UCSB  LIBRARY 


HISTORY 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS, 


RESULTING   IN   A 


RESTORATION  OF  THE  APOSTOLIC  CHURCH, 


HISTORY  OF  THE  NINETEEN  GENERAL  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 


JOHN  F.  ROWE, 


Author  of  "The  Sketch  of  the  Life  of  Benjamin  Franklin,"  "Analogies  between  the- 

Old  and  the  New  Institutions,"  "The  Bible  versus  Infidelity." 

"The  Bible  its  own  Interpreter,"  "The  Unity 

of  the  Holy  Spirit,"  etc. 


CINCINNATI  : 

G.  W.  RICE,  PUBLISHER. 
1884.      • 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1884,  by 

G.  W.  RICE, 
in  the  Office  of  the  Librarian  of  Congress  at  Washington,  D.  C. 

Elm  Street  Printing  Co.,  176  and  178  Elm  St..  Cincinnati. 


ELECTROTYPED  BY 

CAMPBELL  &  Co.,  61  LONGWORTH  ST., 

CINCINNATI,  OHIO. 


PREFACE. 


IN  preparing  this  work  for  the  public,  we  have  drawn  from  the  most 
reliable  and  distinguished  authorities  extant.  We  have  prepared  the 
work  with  much  labor  and  patient  research.  The  present  work  is  the 
condensation  of  many  volumes.  For  authorities,  we  have  depended  on 
such  standard  works  as  McClintock  and  Strong's  Encyclopedia,  Encyclo- 
pedia Britannica,  Chambers'  Encyclopedia,  Prof.  George  P.  Fisher's  His- 
tory of  lite  Reformation,  Philip  Schaff  's  History  of  the  Christian  Church, 
Neander's  History  of  the  Christian  Religion  and  Church,  and  Prof.  R. 
Richardson's  Memoirs  of  Alexander  Campbell.  In  delineating  the  devel- 
opment of  the  great  apostasy  from  the  original  apostolic  order  of  tilings, 
in  describing  the  successive  Protestant  reformations,  in  setting  forth  the 
restoration  and  identification  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  as  accomplished 
through  the  labors  of  Alexander  Campbell  and  his  coadjutors,  and  in 
giving  a  brief  history  of  the  nineteen  Oecumenical  Church  Councils,  \ve 
have  followed  the  order  of  events  as  closely  as  it  was  possible  to  be  done. 
We  have  aimed  to  give  places,  dates,  and  authorities,  and  corroborating 
testimony  from  disinterested  parties.  In  a  word,  if  there  is  any  relia- 
bility in  history,  it  will  be  found  in  the  following  pages.  We  have 
aimed  to  present  a  systematic  compendium  of  Reformatory  Movements, 
and  as  such  we  ask  our  readers  to  receive  our  work,  bating  all  imper- 
fections, as  purely  a  labor  of  love. 

THE  AUTHOR. 


INTRODUCTION 


FOR  many  years  the  writer  has  himself  felt  the  pressing  need  of  a  work 
of  this  character.  While  young  in  the  ministry,  and  comparatively  poor, 
in  possession  of  very  few  books,  and  having  no  access  to  large  libraries, 
he  continually  felt  himself  hampered  by  the  absence  of  books  of  reference, 
and  felt  himself  crippled  in  his  public  ministrations  because  he  could  not 
find  time,  in  his  struggles  to  live  above  want,  to  ransack  the  pages  of  his- 
tory in  quest  of  the  desired  information.  The  general  reader  needs  just 
such  a  work  as  this,  who,  in  a  moment,  by  referring  to  the  index,  can  find 
what  he  wants  and  satisfy  himself.  The  preacher  needs  it  for  easy  refer- 
ence, and  especially  the  traveling  evangelist,  who  can  not  pack  a  lot  of 
books  with  him.  The  author  of  this  work,  having  frequently  desired  a 
help  of  this  kind,  which  he  could  carry  with  him,  to  aid  him  both  in 
speaking  and  writing  for  the  press,  came  to  the  conclusion  that  others 
might  be  greatly  benefited  by  the  matter  contained  in  it.  The  author 
has  for  a  long  time  had  such  a  work  in  contemplation.  It  is  not  only  in- 
tended for  the  Disciples  of  Christ,  but  it  is  also  prepared  with  a  view  of 
circulating  it  among  the  various  denominations,  and  with  the  purpose  of 
inciting  the  independent  and  untrammeled  thinkers  in  the  denominations 
to  investigate  the  pages  of  history  to  see  if  these  things  are  so. 

Within  the  compass  of  this  work,  we  have  aimed  to  give  a  connected 
view  of  the  Reformatory  Movements: from  Martin  Luther  down  to  thetimes 
of  th  i  great  reformer,  Alexander  Campbell.  The  reader  will  discover  the 
fact  that  while  such  illustrious  reformers  as  Luther,  Zwingli,  Melancthon, 
Calvin,  Knox,  and  Wesley,  only  aimed  at  reforming  existing  abuses  and 

(v) 


VI  INTRODUCTION. 

immoralities  in  the  Church,  Campbell  sought  the  complete  restoration  of 
apostolic  principles  and  practices,  and,  having  determined  upon  a  work 
of  that  character,  did  actually  raise  up  a  body  of  people  identical  with 
primitive  Christians,  both  in  faith  and  practice.  The  plan  of  the  work  is 
as  follows: 

I.  A  brief  statement  of  the  primitive  order  of  things.  2.  A  sketch 
of  the  apostasy  from  the  third  century  down  to  the  times  of  Luther,  or 
to  the  Reformation  of  the  Sixteenth  Century.  3.  A  connected  history 
of  the  Protestant  period,  which  embraces  the  efforts  made  at  reforma- 
tion during  the  space  of  three  hundred  years.  4.  The  Restoration 
of  the  Apostolic  Church.  5.  A  history  of  the  nineteen  CEcumenical 
Church  Councils — the  study  of  the  proceedings  of  which  is  highly  in- 
structive and  interesting,  they  serving  as  a  sort  of  spiritual  thermometer 
of  the  troublous  times  of  the  Church,  as  the  Church  was  manipulated  by 
princes  and  priests.  The  various  decrees  of  successive  councils  will  show 
how  kings  and  princes  were  deposed,  the  rivalries  of  ambitious  men  in 
Church  and  State,  the  origin  of  image  worship,  auricular  confession, 
penance,  the  mass,  celibacy,  purgatory,  prayers  for  the  dead,  transubstan- 
tiation,  etc..  etc.  The  subjects  we  have  enumerated  should  be  studied 
as  they  are  not  studied  in  these  days  of  flashy  literature  and  fast  living. 
There  is  entirely  too  much  superficial  reading  done,  even  by  ministers  of 
the  gospel,  who  should  be  in  possession  of  a  general  knowledge  of  Church 
history,  without  which  they  will  feel  themselves  more  or  less  annoyed  and 
crippled  in  their  ministerial  work.  People  who  profess  to  be  reformers 
can  not  very  well  progress  as  reformers  unless  they  have  an  intelligent 
view  of  the  situation,  as  we  have  outlined  it  in  this  work.  The  general 
reader,  engaged  in  secular  employments,  who  has  not  the  time  to  explore 
the  pages  of  many  volumes,  and  not  even  time  to  consult  books  of  refer- 
ence, will,  we  feel  confident,  find  this  work  of  great  advantage  to  him, 
that  it  will  aid  him  very  much  in  ascertaining  the  facts  of  history,  and 
furnish  him  with  facts  and  data  with  which  to  make  just  comparison  be- 
tween truth  and  error,  between  what  God  has  decreed,  and  what  man  has 
invented,  and  especially  show  him  the  difference  between  reforming  imper- 
fect church  organizations  and  restoring  the  Church  of  Christ  as  founded 
by  the  apostles. 


INTRODUCTION.  Vll 

We  should  probably  apologize  to  the  general  reader  for  investing  por- 
tions of  this  work  with  a  show  of  too  much  learning  and  too  much  refined 
scholarship  ;  but  we  found  it  impossible  to  prepare  a  work  of  this  charac- 
ter— which  is  history  condensed — and  dress  it  up  in  a  simple  garb  of 
words  and  terms  of  speech,  without  marring  more  or  less  the  pages  of 
history,  and  without  doing  injustice  to  the  subjects  treated  and  to  the 
authors  quoted. 

If  the  reader  shall  derive  as  much  benefit  and  pleasure  in  perusing 
these  pages,  as  the  author  has  derived  from  the  preparation  of  the  work, 
the  author  will  feel  that  he  has  not  labored  in  vain. 


CONTENTS. 


PAGE. 

Preface, 3 

Introduction,     ...........        5 

Contents.       ....  8 


CHAPTER  I. — THE  PRIMITIVE  CHURCH, 1 1 

CHAPTER  II. — Union  of  Church  and  State, 16 

CHAPTER  III. — Conflict  between  Church  and  State,          .        .        .19 

CHAPTER  IV. — Culmination  of  the  Papacy,           .         .         .  22 

CHAPTER  V. — The  Papacy  and  Episcopacy, 27 

CHAPTER  VI. — Leo  X  and  Luther 31 

CHAPTER  VII. — The  Dawn  of  the  Reformation,                ,        .        .  34 

CHAPTER  VIII.— The  Mystics,      ..-....,  37 

CHAPTER  IX. — Luther  and  the  Man  of  Sin, 40 

CHAPTER  X. — Origin  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,        ...  48 

CHAPTER  XI. — Reformation  in  Switzerland,      .....  56 

CHAPTER  XII.— Origin  of  the  Heidelberg  Confession,           .         .  59 

(viii) 


CONTENTS.  ix 


CHAPTER  XIII. — John  Calvin  and  Calvinism,   .         .         . 

CHAPTER  XIV. — Origin  c^.  the  Church  of  England,     .         .         .  71 

CHAPTER  XV.— The  Thirty-Nine  Articles, 75 

CHAPTER  XVI. — The  Book  of  Common  Prayer,    ....  8 

CHAPTER  XVII. — Origin  of  the  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith,  .       87 

CHAPTER  XVIII. — Origin  of  Congregationalism,           „  94 

CHAPTER  XIX. — American  Congregationalism,          ....  97 

CHAPTER  XX. — Origin  of  the  Baptist  Church,      ....  102 

CHAPTER  XXI. — The  Baptist  Church  in  the  United  States,       .  .112 

CHAPTER  XXII.— Origin  of  Methodism,        .         .         .         .         ,  119 

CHAPTER  XXIII. — Origin  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  .     123 

CHAPTER  XXIV. — Wesley  not  a  Methodist,           .         .         .         .  128 

CHAPTER  XXV. — The  Reformation  of  the  Nineteenth  Century,  .     136 

CHAPTER  XXVI. — Attempts  at  Reformation,         .         .         .         „  144 

CHAPTER  XXVII.— The  Word  of  God  the  Sole  Rule  of  Action,  .     148 

CHAPTER  XXVIII. — Attempts  at  Christian  Union,        .         .         .  153 

CHAPTER  XXIX. — Fundamental  Principles,      .         .         .         .  .     157 

CHAPTER  XXX. — The  Restoration,       .         „         .         .         .         .  161 

CHAPTER  XXXI.— The  Bible  the  only  Creed, 167 

CHAPTER  XXXII. — Alexander  Campbell  Abandons  Sectarianism,  17  i 

CHAPTER  XXXIII.— A.  Campbell  Unites  with  the  Baptists,      .  .     i;S 

CHAPTER  XXXIV. — A  Similar  Reformation  in  Kentucky,     .         .  iS6 

CHAPTER  XXXV.— The  Church  of  Christ  Identified,    *    .          .  .192 

CHAPTER  XXXVI. — The  Restoration  of  Apostolic  Christianity,  199 


X  CONTEXTS. 

I'AtJE. 

HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS 205 

I.  Apostolic  Council,  .......         207 

II.  Council  of  Nice,        ........  208 

The  Nicene  Creed,      ........  212 

Councils  of  Constantinople,     .......  218 

General  Council  of  Ephesus,        .         .         .         .         .         .  221 

Council  of  Chalcedon,     ........  223 

The  Second  Council  of  Nice,       ......  227 

Lateran  Councils,    .         .         .         .         .         .         .         .         .231 

The  Councils  of  Lyons,        .......  246 

Councils  of  Vienne,         ........  246 

Council  of  Constance,           .......  249 

The  Council  at  Basle,       ........  250 

Council  of  Trent,         ........  254 

GOSPEL  PRINCIPLES. 

Faith  and  Sight,      .........  261 

Reformation  of  Life,             .......  273 

The  Good  Confession,      ........  280 

Immersion,           .........  286 

Immersion — Sprinkle — Pour.     Which?   .....  299 

The  Holy  Spirit, 306 

The  Baptism  in  the  Spirit,       .         .         .         .         .         .         .312 

Impartation  of  the  Holy  Spirit  by  Apostolic  Hands,    .         .  316 
The  Word  as  Revealed  by  the  Holy  Spirit,      .         .         .         -319 

The  Confirmation  of  the  Revealed  Word,    ....  325 

The  Gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 331 

The  Witness  of  the  Spirit, 339 

The  Law  of  the  Spirit 344 


HISTORY    OF 

REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. 


THE  PRIMITIVE  CHURCH. 


ONE  essential  feature  of  Protestantism  was  the  aboli- 
tion of  the  authority  of  the  hierarchical  order.  In  its 
mature  form,  as  all  history  attests,  the  Reformation  of 
the  sixteenth  century  was  a  rejection  of  Papal  and 
priestly  authority.  As  antecedent  to  the  rise  of  the 
Reformation,  we  propose  to  write  several  articles  on  the 
origin  and  progressive  development  of  the  hierarchical 
system.  The  Papacy  began  by  invading  the  personal 
rights  and  prerogatives  of  the  disciples  of  Christ,  who 
stood  upon  a  common  plane  of  equality,  and  by  insti- 
tuting a  mediatorial  priesthood,  which,  setting  aside  the 
office  of  the  great  Mediator,  assumed  to  mediate  be- 
tween God  and  man.  It  was  an  invasion  of  that  order 
of  heaven,  as  recorded  in  the  New  Testament,  which 
gave  liberty  to  the  soul  and  direct  access  to  the  heavenly 
Father  through  the  one  High  Priest  of  our  salvation. 

(11) 


12  THE  PRIMITIVE  CHURCH. 

The  rise  of  sacerdotalism  destroyed  the  equality  of  dis- 
cipleship.  The  disciples  of  Christ,  under  apostolic 
teaching,  formed  a  community  of  brethren,  who  were 
associated  upon  a  broad  basis  of  equality,  all  of  them 
being  illuminated  and  directed  and  united  in  the  one 
Spirit.  Their  organization  under  Christ,  was  a  marvel 
of  simplicity,  and  very  unlike  that  hierarchical  system 
which  in  subsequent  times  overshadowed  the  Church  of 
the  living  God — very  dissimilar  from  the  individual  con- 
gregation where  all  the  members  served  each  other  in 
love  and  faith. 

The  New  Testament  records  the  fact  that  all  Chris- 
tians, in  a  given  locality,  were  united  in  one  society,  or 
ecclesia,  the  old  Greek  term  for  an  Assembly  legally 
called  and  authorized.  In  each  society  there  was  a 
board  of  pastors,  indifferently  called  elders,  presbyters 
— a  name  taken  from  the  synagogue — or  interchange- 
ably styled  bishops,  overseers,  a  name  given  by  the 
Greeks  to  persons  charged  with  a  guiding  oversight  in 
civil  administration.  In  the  election  of  these  pastors — 
feeders  of  the  flock — the  body  of  disciples  enjoyed  a 
controlling  voice,  although  as  long  as  the  apostles  re- 
mained, their  suggestions  or  appointments  would  natu- 
rally be  accepted.  These  officers  did  not  give  up,  at  first, 
their  secular  employments;  they  were  not  even,  at  the 
outset,  intrusted  as  a  peculiar  function  with  the  business 
of  teaching,  which  was  free  to  all  and  especially  imposed 
upon  a  class  of  persons  who  seemed  designated  by  their 
various  gifts  for  this  work.  The  elders,  with  the  dea- 
cons, whose  business  it  was  to  look  after  the  poor  and 
to  perform  kindred  duties,  were  the  officers  to  whom 
each  little  separate  community  committed  the  lead  in 
the  management  of  its  affairs.  But,  as  we  approach 
the  close  of  the  second  century,  we  find  marked  changes ; 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  13 

some  of  them  of  a  portentous  and  dangerous  character, 
and  as  already  indicative  of  the  fact  that  the  apostasy 
had  set  in.  The  enlargement  of  the  jurisdiction  of  bish- 
ops by  extending  it  over  dependent  churches  in  the 
neighborhood  of  the  towns  and  cities,  and  the  multiply- 
ing of  church  officers,  were  innovations  significant  of 
coming  evils.  By  degrees  church  officer's,  by  assuming 
powers  which  did  not  belong  to  them,  grew  into  a  dis- 
tinct order,  and  placed  themselves  above  the  "laity"  as 
the  appointed  medium  of  conveying  to  them  the  grace 
of  God.  A  church  in  the  capital  of  a  province,  with  its 
bishop,  easily  acquired  a  precedence  over  the  other 
churches  and  bishops  in  the  same  district,  and  thus  the 
metropolitan  system  grew  up.  A  higher  grade  of  emi- 
nence was  accorded  to  the  bishops  and  churches  of  the 
principal  cities,  such  as  Rome,  Alexander  and  Ephesus; 
and  thus  we  have  the  germs  of  a  more  extended  hier- 
archical dominion.  Even  as  early  as  the  latter  part  of 
the  second  century,  the  Church  has  passed  into  the  con- 
dition of  a  visible  organized  commonwealth.  We  find 
Irenseus,  who  was  bishop  of  Lyons  from  177  to  202,  ut- 
tering the  famous  dictum  that  where  the  Church  is — 
meaning  the  visible  body  with  its  clergy  and  sacraments 
— there  is  the  Spirit  of  God,  and  where  the  Spirit  of 
God  is  there  is  the  Church.  To  be  cut  off  from  this  vis- 
ible Church  is  to  be  separated  from  Christ.  By  the 
clergy  of  that  period,  this  church  was  made  the  door  of 
access  to  the  favor  of  God.  We  can  also  readily  account 
for  the  importance  that  began  to  be  attached  to  tradi- 
tion; for  the  defenders  of  the  true  Church  of  Christ 
against  the  corrupting  encroachments  of  gnosticism, 
naturally  fell  back  on  the  historical  evidence  afforded  by 
the  presence  and  testimony  of  the  leading  churches, 
which  the  apostles  themselves  had  planted.  Ircnseus 


14  THE  PRIMITIVE  CHURCH. 

and  Tertullian  (the  latter  a  presbyter  at  Carthage,  where 
he  died  between  the  years  220  aud  240),  direct  the  in- 
quirer to  go  to  Corinth,  Rome,  Ephesus,  to  the  places 
where  the  apostles  had  taught,  and  ascertain  whether 
the  novel  speculations  of  the  time  could  justly  claim  the 
sanction  of  the  first  disciples  of  Christ,  or  had  been 
transmitted  from  them. 

Says  a  distinguished  author:  "It  is  the  pre-eminence 
of  Rome,  as  the  custodian  of  traditions,  that  Irenseus 
means  to  assert  in  a  noted  passage  (lib.  III.  iii.  2)  in 
which  he  exalts  the  Church/'  It  was  not  long  until  the 
unity  of  the  Church,  as  a  visible,  towering  organization, 
was  realized  in  the  unity  of  the  sacerdotal  body.  It 
was  but  a  natural  and  logical  sequence  to  seek  and  find 
a  head  for  this  traditionized  and  secularized  body ;  and 
where  should  it  be  found  except  in  mystic  Rome,  the 
capital  of  the  world,  the  seat  of  the  predominating 
Church,  where  Paul  had  suffered  martyrdom,  and  where 
many  believed  (but  erroneously)  that  Peter  also  perished 
as  a  martyr.  After  the  sacerdotal  order  had  raised  Peter 
to  be  chief  of  the  apostles,  and  when,  near  the  close  of 
the  second  century,  the  idea  was  suggested  and  became 
current  that  Peter  had  served  as  bishop  of  the  Roman 
Church,  a  strong  foundation  was  laid  in  the  minds  of 
credulous  men  for  a  recognition  of  the  primacy  of  that 
Church  and  of  its  chief  pastor.  The  first  mention  of 
Peter  as  bishop  of  Rome  is  found  in  the  Clementine 
Homilies,  which  were  composed  in  the  latter  part  of  the 
second  century.  The  habit  of  thus  deferring  to  the  see 
of  Rome,  as  the  center  of  ecclesiastical  authority,  so  far 
advances  upon  the  credulity  of  the  people,  that  in  the 
middle  of  the  third  century  we  find  Cyprian,  whose  zeal 
for  episcopal  independence  would  not  tolerate  the  sub- 
jection of  one  bishop  to  another,  still  speaking  of  that 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  15 

see  as  the  chief  source  of  sacerdotal  unity.  Rome  was 
a  mighty  and  a  glorious  city.  The  eyes  of  all  nations 
were  intently  fixed  upon  it,  as  the  metropolis  of  wealth 
and  splendor  and  political  power.  It  was  an  easy  thing 
to  transfer  this  awe  and  reverence  to  the  Church  which 
had  its  seat  in  the  eternal  City.  Leo  I.,  with  arrogant 
pretensions,  claimed  that  the  Roman  Empire  was  built 
with  reference  to  Christianity,  and  that  Rome,  for  this 
reason,  was  chosen  for  the  bishopric  of  the  chief  of  the 
apostles,  Leo  flourished  in  the  fifth  century. 


UNION  OF  CHURCH  AND  STATE. 


THE  accession  of  Constantino  (311)  found  the  Church 
so  firmly  organized  under  its  hierarchy  that  it  could  not 
be  absolutely  merged  in  the  State,  as  might  have  been 
the  result  had  its  constitution  been  different.  But 
under  him  and  his  successors,  the  supremacy  of  the 
State,  with  a  large,  control  of  ecclesiastical  affairs,  was 
maintained  by  the  emperors.  General  councils,  for  ex- 
ample, wrere  convoked  by  them  and  presided  over  by 
their  representatives,  and  conciliary  decrees  published  as 
laws  of  the  Empire.  The  Roman  bishops  felt  it  to  be 
an  honor  to  be  judged  only  by  the  emperor.  In  the 
closing  period  of  imperial  history,  the  emperors  favored 
the  ecclesiastical  primacy  of  the  Roman  see,  as  a  bond 
of  unity  in  the  Empire.  Political  disorders  and  con- 
flicting interests  tended  to  elevate  the  position  of  the 
Roman  bishop,  especially  when  he  was  a  person  of  more 
than  ordinary  talents  and  energy.  Leo  the  Great  (440- 
461),  the  first,  perhaps,  who  had  conferred  upon  him 
the  title  of  Pope,  proved  himself  a  pillar  of  strength  in 
the  midst  of  tumult  and  anarchy.  His  conspicuous 
services,  as  in  shielding  Rome  from  the  incursions  of 
barbarians  and  protecting  its  inhabitants,  facilitated  the 
exercise  of  a  spiritual  jurisdiction  that  stretched  not  only 
over  Italy,  but  as  far  as  Gaul  and  Africa.  To  him  was 
given  by  Valentinian  III.  (445)  an  imperial  declaration 
which  made  him  supreme  over  the  Western  Church,  or 

(16) 


BEFORMATOKY  MOVEMENTS.  17 

the  Church  of  Rome.  "We  can  not  follow  the  alterna- 
tions of  the  priestly  powers  of  Rome,  nor  consume 
space  by  depicting  the  varying  fortunes  of  popes  and 
princes.  We  can  record  the  fact  that  in  the  fifth 
century  the  fall  of  the  Western  Empire  increased  the 
authority  of  the  bishop  of  Rome ;  we  can  speak  of  the 
spread  of  Mohammedanism  from  Africa  and  Spain  into 
Europe;  of  the  alliance  of  the  Papacy  with  the  Franks 
in  750;  of  the  rescue  of  the  Papacy  by  Pepin  and 
Charlemagne,  and  of  the  coronation  of  the  latter  by  the 
hands  of  the  Pope,  in  the  Basilica  of  St.  Peter,  on 
Christmas  Day,  800.  Taking  advantage  of  the  conflicts 
and  disorders  in  the  empire  of  Charlemagne,  and  seiz. 
ing  the  opportunity  of  his  death,  which  created  an  era 
of  political  strife  and  unrest,  the  Roman  bishops  rapidly 
began  to  increase  in  power.  It  was  in  this  period  that 
the  False  or  Pseudo  Isoderian  Decretals  appeared.  These 
false  decretals  introduced  principles  of  ecclesiastical  law 
which  made  the  Church  dependent  on  the  State,  and 
elevated  the  Roman  See  to  a  position  unknown  to  pre 
ceding  ages.  The  immunity  and  high  prerogatives  of 
bishops,  the  exaltation  of  primates,  as  the  servile  tools 
of  the  popes,  above  metropolitans  who  were  slavishly 
dependent  upon  secular  rulers,  and  the  ascription  of  the 
highest  legislative  and  judicial  functions  to  the  Roman 
Pontiff,  were  some  of  the  leading  and  characteristic 
features  of  this  spurious  collection,  which  found  its  way 
into  the  codes  of  the  canon  law,  and  which  radically 
modified  the  ancient  ecclesiastical  system.  These  false 
decretals  first  appeared  about  the  middle  of  the  ninth 
century,  and  they  only  needed  a  pope  of  sufficient  talents 
and  energy  to  give  practical  effect  to  such  pernicious 
principles;  and  such  an  instrument  appeared  in  the 
person  of  Nicholas  I,  between  the  years  858  and  867. 
2 


18  UNION  OF  CHURCH  AND  STATE. 

Availing  himself  of  a  favorable  opportunity,  he  brought 
Lothair  II.,  king  of  Lorraine,  under  the  censure  of  the 
Church,  whom,  in  a  case  of  matrimony,  he  compelled 
to  submit  to  the  decrees  of  the  Papacy,  while  at  the 
same  time  he  deposed  the  archbishops  who  had  en- 
deavored to  thwart  his  purpose.  At  the  same  time, 
Nicholas  humbled  Hincmar,  the  powerful  archbishop 
of  Rheims,  who  had  disregarded  the  appeal  which  one 
of  his  bishops  had  made  to  Rome. 

According  to  Baronius,  a  distinguished  Roman  Catho- 
lic annalist,  the  anarchical  condition  into  which  the  em- 
pire ultimately  fell,  left  the  Papacy,  for  a  century  and  a 
half,  the  prey  of  Italian  factions,  by  the  agency  of  which 
the  papal  office  was  reduced  to  a  lower  point  of  moral 
degradation  than  it  ever  reached  before  or  since.  This 
period  of  moral  and  social  debasement — during  a  con- 
siderable portion  of  which  time  harlots  disposed  of  the 
papal  office,  and  their  paramours  wore  the  tiara — was 
interrupted  by  the  intervention  of  the  German  sover- 
eigns, Otho  I.  and  Otho  II. ;  with  the  first  of  whom  the 
Holy  Roman  Empire,  in  the  sense  in  which  the  name  is 
used  in  subsequent  ages,  the  secular  counterpart  of  the 
Papacy,  derives  its  origin.  The  pontiffs  preferred  the 
sway  of  the  emperors  to  that  of  the  lawless  Italian 
barons,  says  Von  Raumer.  This  dark  period,  in  which 
nearly  all  traces  of  apostolic  usages  disappeared,  was 
terminated  by  Henry  III.,  who  appeared  in  Italy  at  the 
head  of  an  army,  and,  in  1046,  at  the  Synod  of  Sutri, 
which  he  had  convoked,  dethroned  three  rival  popes, 
and  raised  to  the  vacant  office  one  of  his  own  bishops. 
The  imperial  office  had  passed  into  the  hands  of  the 
German  kings,  and  they,  like  their  Carlovingian  prede- 
cessors, whose  acts  in  history  we  have  purposely  omitted, 
rescued  the  Papacy  from  destruction. 


CONFLICT  BETWEEN  CHURCH  AND  STATE. 


WHEN  we  reach  the  age  of  Hildebrand  (1073—1085), 
we  find  plots  and  counterplots  the  order  of  the  day. 
While  this  pretended  reformer  apparently  sought  a 
thorough  reformation  of  morals  and  a  restoration  of 
ecclesiastical  order  and  sacerdotal  discipline,  he  under- 
took at  the  same  time  to  subordinate  the  State  to  the 
Church,  and  to  subject  the  Church,  such  as  it  was,  to 
the  absolute  authority  of  the  Pope.  The  course  pursued 
by  Hildebrand  and  by  aspiring  pontiffs  who  succeeded 
him,  in  the  course  of  time,  resulted  in  an  open  conflict 
between  the  Papacy  and  the  Empire.  Here  follows  a 
severe  and  persistent  contest,  in  which  the  Papacy  gain 
a  decided  advantage.  That  the  emperqr  was  commis- 
sioned to  preside  over  the  temporal  affairs  of  men,  while 
it  was  left  for  the  Pope  to  guide  and  govern  them  in 
things  spiritual,  was  a  criterion  too  vague  for  denning 
the  limits  of  temporal  and  spiritual  jurisdiction.  The 
co-ordination,  the  equilibrium  of  the  civil  and  ecclesias- 
tical powers,  was  a  relation  with  which,  as  any  one 
might  know,  who  is  conversant  with  the  history  of 
despotic  governments,  neither  party  would  be  content. 
It  was  a  struggle  on  both  sides  for  universal  monarchy. 
The  apostolic  order  of  things  now  comrpletely  fades  out 
of  view.  The  popes,  by  continual  strategy  and  rare 
diplomacy,  gained  an  ascendency  over  Western  Europe, 
and,  for  successive  years,  the  Pope  everywhere  was  the 

(19) 


20  CONFLICT  BETWEEN  CHURCH  AND  STATE. 

acknowledged  head  of  Latin  Christianity.  Sometimes 
the  Roman  pontiffs,  when  they  saw  an  opportunity  of 
centralizing  and  consolidating  their  system  of  spiritual 
despotism,  became  the  champions  then,  as  they  have 
frequently  since,  as  suits  their  base  designs,  of  popular 
freedom.  Acting  in  the  role  of  Mephistopheles,  they 
can,  in  turn,  become  republicans,  monarchists,  democrats, 
autocrats  and  imperialists,  if  by  such  transformation 
they  can  subserve  the  interests  of  the  Papacy.  The  end 
sanctifies  the  means.  The  humiliation  of  JJeury  IV.  in 
1077,  whom  Hildebrand  kept  waiting  during  three 
winter  days,  in  the  garb  of  a  penitent,  in  the  yard  of 
the  castle  of  Canossa,  gives  evidence  of  the  supremacy 
of  the  Papacy  in  the  medieval  age.  The  Worms  Con- 
cordat which  Calixtus  II.  concluded  with  Henry  V.  in 
1122,  and  the  acknowledgment  which  Frederick  Bar- 
barossa  made  of  his  sin  and  error  to  Alexander  III.  at 
Venice,  in  1177,  after  a  long  contest  for  imperial  preroga- 
tives, are  facts  which  furnish  evidence  of  the  triumph 
of  the  Papacy.  The  triumph  of  the  Papacy  appeared 
complete  when  Gregory  X.  (1271-1276)  directed  the 
electoral  princes  to  choose  an  emperor  within  a  given 
interval,  and  threatened,  in  case  they  refused  compliance 
with  the  mandate,  to  appoint,  in  conjunction  with  his 
cardinals,  an  emperor  for  them;  and  when  Rudolph  of 
Hapsburg,  whom  they  proceeded  to  select,  acknowl- 
edged in  the  most  unreserved  and  subservient  manner 
the  Pope's  supremacy. 

These  are  strange  developments  of  church  affairs, 
compared  with  the  origin  of  Christianity  and  primitive 
gospel  simplicity.  The  facts  that  we  glean  and  scrap 
from  the  Dark  Ages,  are  the  full  fruitage  of  the  work- 
ings of  the  "mystery  of  iniquity"  alluded  to  by  the 
apostle  Paul.  It  is  impossible  to  furnish  the  details  of 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  21 

history  within  our  limited  space,  but  it  is  our  purpose 
to  give  a  connected  view  of  the  rise  and  development 
of  the  Papacy,  and  to  represent  in  as  few  words  as  possi- 
ble the  ruin  of  the  ancient  Church,  and  the  subsequent 
growth  of  an  apostate  Church.  And  this  we  do  in 
order  to  show  the  relation  which  Romanism  sustains  to 
Protestantism,  and  the  relation  which  we  sustain  to  both 
these  in  our  plea  for  a  perfectly  restored  Christianity. 
That  there  was  a  remnant  of  the  true  worshipers  of  God 
found  here  and  there,  during  the  Dark  Ages,  such  as 
the  Nestorians,  is  a  pleasing  fact  well  established  in 
history;  but  that  nearly  all  traces  of  the  primitive  order 
of  things,  as  established  by  the  apostles  of  Jesus  Christ, 
are  lost  sight  of  in  the  raging  conflicts  of  rival  princes 
and  aspiring  ecclesiastics,  both  of  which  powers,  as  they 
alternated  repeatedly  between  victory  and  defeat,  crushed 
down  the  liberties  of  the  people  and  despoiled  them  of 
their  personal  rights,  are  facts  patent  and  intelligible  to 
all  readers  of  history.  We  wish  the  people  of  this 
generation,  as  well  as  the  people  of  succeeding  genera- 
tions, to  know  the  reasons  why  we  stand  apart  from  all 
denominations,  Papal  and  Protestant,  and  why  we  pro- 
pose to  stand  only  upon  apostolic  ground. 


CULMINATION  OF  THE  PAPACY. 


FROM  the  best  authorities  we  have  consulted,  we  learn 
that  it  was  during  the  progress  of  the  struggle  with  the 
empire  that  the  Papal  powers  may  be  said  to  have  cul- 
minated. In  the  period  between  1198  and  1216,  in 
which  Innocent  III.  reigned,  the  Papal  despotism  shone 
forth  in  all  its  ecclesiastical  splendor.  The  enforcement 
of  celibacy  had  placed  the  entire  body  of  the  clergy  in 
a  closer  relation  to  the  sovereign  Pontiff.  The  Vicar  of 
Peter  had  become  the  Yicar  of  God  and  of  Christ.  The 
idea  of  a  Theocracy  on  earth,  in  which  the  Pope  should 
presumptuously  rule  in  this  character,  fully  possessed 
the  mind  of  Innocent,  who,  having  profited  by  the  bold- 
ness, and  persistency,  and  political  finesse  of  Gregory 
VII.,  excelled  the  latter  in  diplomacy  and  political  strat- 
egy. He  worked  himself  up  to  believe  that  the  two 
swords  of  temporal  and  ecclesiastical  power  had  both 
been  given  to  Peter  and  his  successors,  so  that  the 
earthly  sovereign  derived  his  prerogative  from  the  great 
Head  of  the  Church.  The  Pope  was  constituted  to  shine 
as  the  great  luminary  of  the  world,  and  the  king  or  civil 
ruler  could  only  shine  from  borrowed  light.  Acting  on 
this  theory — the  consummation  of  spiritual  despotism — 
Innocent  assumed  the  position  of  arbiter  in  the  conflicts 
of  nations,  and  claimed  the  right  to  dethrone  kings  and 
princes  at  his  pleasure.  "We  have  not  space  to  give  ex- 

(22) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  23 

amples  of  his  despotism,  with  which  the  pages  of  his- 
tory are  disgraced. 

In  the  Church  he  assumed  the  character  of  universal 
bishop,  based  upon  the  theory  that  all  episcopal  power 
was  originally  deposited  in  Peter  and  in  his  successors, 
and  communicated  through  this  source  to  bishops,  who 
were  in  this  manner  constituted  the  only  vicars  of  the 
Pope,  and  who  might  at  any  time  be  deposed  at  the 
will  or  beck  of  the  Pope.  To  him  belonged  all  legisla- 
tive authority,  councils  having  merely  a  deliberate 
power,  while  the  right  to  convoke  them  and  to  ratify  or 
annul  their  proceedings  belonged  exclusively  to  him. 
He  alone,  in  the  role  of  an  absolute  autocrat,  was 
exempt  from  all  law,  and  might  dispense  with  them  in 
the  case  of  others.  Even  the  doctrine  of  Papal  infalli- 
bility, which  brought  forth  its  legitimate  fruit  in  the 
reign  of  Pope  Pius  IX.,  was  discovered  in  the  writings 
of  Thomas  Aquinas,  the  most  eminent  theologian  of 
that  age.  As  the  feudal  system  gradually  gave  way  to 
political  monarchy,  so  the  independency  of  the  churches 
was  absorbed  and  concentrated  in  the  Pope.  The  right 
to  confirm  the  appointment  of  all  bishops,  the  right 
even  to  nominate  bishops  and  to  dispose  of  all  bene- 
fices, the  exclusive  right  of  absolution,  canonization 
and  dispensation,  the  right  to  assess  the  churches — such 
were  some  of  the  iniquitous  prerogatives,  for  the  en- 
forcement of  which  Papal  legates,  clothed  with  limitless 
powers,  were  commissioned  to  penetrate  all  the  coun- 
tries of  Europe,  in  order  to  override  the  authority  of 
bishops  and  of  local  ecclesiastical  tribunals.  About 
this  time  originated  the  famous  mendicant  orders  of  St. 
Francis  and  St.  Dominic,  from  which  beggarly  institu- 
tions there  came"  forth  a  swarm  of  itinerant  preachers, 
who,  as  the  pets  of  the  Pope,  were  very  intimately  asso- 


24  CULMINATION  OF  THE  PAPACY. 

elated  with  his  pontifical  Highness,  and  who  were  ever 
ready,  as  pliant  tools,  to  defend  Papal  prerogatives  and 
Papal  extortions  against  whatever  opposition  might 
arise  from  the  secular  clergy.  Insinuating  themselves, 
serpent-like,  within  the  walls  of  the  universities  of 
Europe,  they  defined  and  defended,  in  lectures  replete 
with  subtilties  and  sophistries,  and  by  a  pretended  array 
of  scholastic  wisdom,  all  the  usurpations  of  the  Papacy. 
Conflicts  between  popes  and  temporal  princes  contin- 
ued. The  Papal  assertions  in  regard  to  the  two  swords^ 
the  supremacy  of  the  ecclesiastical  over  the  secular 
power,  and  the  subjection  of  every  living  soul  to  the 
Pope,  who  judges  all  and  is  judged  by  none,  were  met 
by  a  united  and  determined  resistance  on  the  part  of 
the  French  people.  When  Boniface  VIII.  summoned 
the  French  clergy  to  Rome  to  sit  in  judgment  on  the 
acts  of  the  king,  the  summons  aroused  a  storm  of  in- 
dignation. The  Papal  Bull,  snatched  from  the  hand  of 
the  legate,  was  publicly  burned  in  Notre  Dame,  on  the 
llth  of  February,  1302.  The  insulted  clergy  of  France 
flatly  denied  the  proposition  that  in  secular  aft'airs,  the 
Pope  stands  above  the  king.  The  prestige  of  the 
Papacy  now  began  to  wane  rapidly.  There  was  an  ex- 
pansion of  knowledge  in  every  direction.  Political  re- 
formers came  to  the  front.  Literature  began  to  spread, 
and  poets  and  jurists,  of  learning  and  distinction,  began 
to  exert  a  powerful  influence  in  the  direction  of  civil 
and  religious  liberty.  There  comes  the  period  of  the 
Babylonian  captivity,  or  the  long  residence  of  the 
Pope  at  Avignon  —  called  the  Babylonian  captivity, 
because  it  continued  about  as  long  as  the  captivity  of 
the  Jews  in  ancient  Babylon — and  the  period  of  the 
great  schism,  when,  during  a  great  part  of  this  period, 
the  Papacy  was  enslaved  to  France,  and  served  the 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  25 

behests  of  the  French  court.  Various  forms  of  ecclesi- 
astical oppression  followed,  which  involved  Germany, 
England,  and  other  countries  in  humiliation.  The 
revenues  of  the  court  at  Avignon  were  supplied  by 
means  of  extortions  and  usurpations  which  had  hitherto 
been  without  parallel.  Every  form  of  extortion  was 
resorted  to  for  replenishing  the  Papal  treasury.  France 
was  willing,  as  long  as  the  Papacy  remained  her  tool,  to 
indulge  the  popes  in  extravagant  assumptions  of  au- 
thority. Avignon  became  the  headquarters  of  an  ex- 
tremely luxurious  and  profligate  court — a  cesspool  of  vice 
— the  boundless  immorality  of  which  has  been  vividly 
depicted  by  Petrarch,  who  himself  was  an  eye-witness 
to  the  shameful  abominations.  Then  arose  the  great 
battle  of  the  fourteenth  century,  between  the  Monarch- 
ists and  the  Papists,  when  such  celebrated  writers  as 
Marsilius  of  Padua,  William  of  Occam,  and  Dante,  as 
the  defenders  of  the  "Monarchists,"  vigorously  de- 
nounced the  presumptions  of  the  Papacy.  "  These  bold 
writings  attacked  the  collective  hierarchy  in  all  its  fun- 
damental principles;  they  inquired,  with  a  sharpness  of 
criticism  before  unknown,  into  the  nature  of  the  priestly 
office;  they  restricted  the  notion  of  heresy,  to  which 
the  Church  had  given  so  wide  an  extension ;  they  ap- 
pealed, finally,  to  the  Holy  Scriptures,  as  the  only  valid 
authority  in  matters  of  faith.  As  fervent  monarchists, 
these  theologians  subjected  the  Church  to  the  State. 
Their  heretical  tendencies  announced  a  new  process  in 
the  minds  of  men,  in  which  the  unity  of  the  Catholic 
Church  went  down." 

During  the  schism  which  ensued  upon  the  election  of 
Urban  VI.,  in  1378,  there  was  presented  before  Christen- 
dom  the   spectacle   of  rival  popes   imprecating  curses 
upon  each  other;  each  with  his  court  to  be  maintained 
3 


26  CULMINATION  OF  TUB  PAPACY. 

by  taxes  and  contributions,  wbich  had  to  be  largely  in- 
creased on  account  of  the  division.  When  men  were 
compelled  to  choose  between  rival  claimants  of  the 
office,  it  was  inevitable  that  there  should  arise  a  still 
deeper  investigation  into  the  origin  and  grounds  of 
Papal  authority.  Inquirers  reverted  to  the  earlier  ages 
of  the  Church,  in  order  to  find  both  the  causes  and  the 
cure  of  the  dreadful  evils  under  which  Christian  society 
was  suffering.  More  than  one  jurist  and  theologian 
called  attention  to  the  ambition  of  the  popes  for  secular 
rule  and  to  their  oppressive  domination  over  the 
Church,  as  the  prime  fountain  of  this  frightful  disorder. 
(History  of  the  Reformation,  by  Qeorge  P.  Fisher.) 


THE  PAPACY  AND  EPISCOPACY. 


A  FRUITLESS  attempt  was  made,  at  about  this  period,  to 
reform,  the  Church  "in  head  and  members."  Princes 
interposed  to  make  peace  between  popes,  as  popes  had 
before  interposed  to  produce  peace  between  princes. 
According  to  Laurent  (La  Reforme),  it  is  the  era  of  the 
Reforming  councils  of  Pisa,  Constance,  and  Basel, 
when,  largely  under  the  leadership  of  the  Paris  theo- 
logians (1409-1443)  a  reformation  in  the  morals  and  ad- 
ministration of  the  Church  was  sought  through  the 
agency  of  these  great  assemblies.  It  was  now  a  conflict 
for  supremacy  between  Papacy  and  Episcopacy.  The 
Pope  was  regarded  as  primate  of  the  Church,  but  at  the 
same  time  it  was  asserted  that  bishops  derived  their 
grace  and  authority  for  the  discharge  of  their  office, 
not  from  the  Pope,  but  from  the  same  source  as  that 
from  which  he  derived  his  powers.  It  was  held  that 
the  Church,  when  convened  by  its  representatives  in  a 
general  council,  is  the  supreme  council,  to  which  the 
Pope  himself  is  subordinate  and  responsible.  "Their 
aim,"  says  Prof.  Fisher,  "was  to  reduce  him  to  the  rank 
of  a  constitutional  instead  of  an  absolute  monarch. 
The  Gallican  theologians  held  to  an  infallibility  resid- 
ing somewhere  in  the  Church;  most  of  them,  and 
ultimately  all  of  them,  placing  this  infallibility  in  ecu- 
menical councils.  The  flattering  hopes  under  which 
the  Council  of  Pisa  opened  its  proceedings,  were 

(27) 


28  THE  PAPACY  AND  EPISCOPACY. 

doomed  to  disappointment,  in  consequence  of  the  re- 
luctance of  the  reformers  to  push  through  their  meas- 
ures without  a  pope,  and  the  failure  of  Alexander  V.  to 
redeem  the  pledges  which  he  had  made  them  prior  to 
his  election.  Moreover,  the  schism  continued,  with 
three  popes  in  the  room  of  two.  The  Council  of  Con- 
stance began  under  the  fairest  auspices.  The  resolve 
to  vote  by  nations  was  a  significant  sign  of  a  new  order 
of  things,  and  crushed  the  design  of  the  flagitious  Pope, 
John  XXIII.,  to  control  the  assembly  by  the  preponder- 
ance of  Italian  votes.  Solemn  declarations  of  the  su- 
premacy and  authority  of  the  Council  were  adopted, 
and  were  carried  out  in  the  actual  deposition  of  the 
infamous  Pope.  But  the  plans  of  reform  were  mostly 
wrecked  on  the  same  rock  on  which  they  had  broken  at 
Pisa.  A  pope  must  be  elected;  and  Martin  V.,  once 
chosen,  by  skillful  management  and  by  separate  ar- 
rangements with  different  princes,  was  unable  to  undo, 
to  a  great  extent,  the  salutary  work  of  the  Council,  and 
even  before  its  adjournment  to  reassert  the  very  doctrine 
of  Papal  superiority  which  the  Council  had  repudiated. 
The  substantial  failure  of  this  Council,  the  most  august 
ecclesiastical  assemblage  of  the  Middle  Ages,  to  achieve 
reforms  which  thoughtful  and  good  men  everywhere 
deemed  indispensable,  was  a  proof  that  some  more  radi- 
cal means  of  reformation  would  have  to  be  adopted. 
But  another  grand  efl'ort  in  the  same  direction  was  put 
forth;  and  the  Council  of  Basel,  notwithstanding  that 
it  adopted  numerous  measures  of  a  beneficent  character, 
which  were  acceptable  to  the  Catholic  nations,  had,  at 
last,  no  better  issue:  for  most  of  the  advantages  that 
were  granted  to  them,  and  the  concessions  that  were 
made  by  the  popes,  especially  to  Germany,  they  con- 
trived afterward,  by  adroit  diplomacy,  to  recall." 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  29 

History  gives  abundant  evidence  of  the  fact  that  no 
good  ever  came  from  human  councils,  which  undertook 
to  interfere  with  and  modify  the  doctrine  and  govern- 
ment of  the  Church  of  Christ.  Only  evil,  and  unmiti- 
gated evil,  ever  emanated  from  such  a  source.  The 
fifteenth  century  was  characterized  by  national  rivalries, 
and  by  the  plots  and  counterplots  of  aspiring  princes, 
who  served  the  Papal  cause,  or  compelled  the  Papacy  to 
serve  them,  as  self-interest  might  dictate.  It  is  difficult 
to  tell  which  exercised  the  most  chicanery,  and  which 
practiced  the  most  intrigue,  or  which  sank  to  the  lowest 
depths  to  gain  power — the  civil  or  ecclesiastical  powers. 
One  thing  is  certain,  and  that  is,  that  selfishness  reigned 
supreme.  In  illustration  of  this  statement,  it  is  recorded 
that  Innocent  VIII.,  besides  advancing  the  fortunes  of 
seven  illegitimate  children,  and  waging  two  wars  with 
Naples,  received  an  annual  tribute  from  the  Sultan  for 
detaining  his  brother  and  rival  in  prison,  instead  of 
sending  him  to  lead  a  force  against  the  Turks,  the  ene- 
mies and  despoilers  of  Christendom.  Alexander  VI., 
whose  deep  depravity  recalls  the  dark  days  of  the 
Papacy  in  the  tenth  century,  busied  himself  in  founding 
a  principality  for  his  favorite  son,  that  monster  of  in- 
iquity, Csesar  Borgia,  and  in  amassing  treasures,  by 
base  and  cruel  means,  for  the  support  of  the  licentious 
Roman  Court.  He  is  said  to  have  died  of  the  poison 
which  he  had  caused  to  be  prepared  for  a  wealthy  car- 
dinal, who  bribed  the  head  cook  to  set  it  before  the 
Pope  himself.  If  Julius  II.  satisfied  the  extortionate 
demands  of  his  relatives  in  a  more  peaceable  way,  lie 
still  found  his  enjoyment  in  carnal  war  and  savage  con- 
quest, and  made  it  his  chief  occupation  to  the  States  of 
the  Church.  According  to  the  testimony  of  Gieseler, 
the  eminent  German  historian,  he  organized  alliances 


30  THE  PAPACY  AND  EPISCOPACY. 

and  defeated  one  enemy  after  another,  forcing  Venice 
to  submit  to  his  outrages,  and  not  hesitating,  old  man 
as  he  was,  to  take  the  field  himself,  in  the  time  of 
winter.  In  1510,  having  brought  in  the  French,  and 
having  joined  the  league  of  Cambray  for  the  sake  of 
subduing  Venice,  he  called  to  his  aid  the  Venetians  for 
the  expulsion  of  the  French.  The  Church,  and  es- 
pecially the  priesthood  of  Rome,  had  become  thor- 
oughly demoralized;  and  this  was  the  condition  of 
things  on  the  eve  of  the  reformation  of  the  sixteenth 
century. 


LEO  X.  AND  LUTHER. 


AT  the  opening  of  the  Reformation,  Leo  X.  was  made 
a  cardinal  at  the  age  of  thirteen,  and  elected  Pope  at  the 
age  of  thirty-seven.  He  was  more  "familiar  with  the 
fables  of  Greece,  and  the  delights  of  the  poets,  than  with 
the  history  of  the  Church  and  the  doctriue  of  the 
Fathers."  He  indulged  in  profane  studies,  'and  gave 
much  of  his  time  to  hunting,  jesting  and  pageants.  He 
sported  in  a  gay  and  luxurious  court,  and  made  religion 
subordinate  to  the  fascinations  of  literature,  art  and 
music.  Vast  sums  of  money,  which  his  religious  subjects 
were  obliged  to  contribute,  were  lavished  upon  his  rel- 
atives, and  the  historian  Ranke  has  characterized  his 
habits  of  life  as  "a  sort  of  intellectual  sensuality." 
Luther  began  his  Reformation  in  the  reign  of  this  cold- 
hearted  Pope.  "During  the  Middle  Ages,"  says  Cole- 
ridge, "  the  Papacy  was  another  name  for  a  confedera- 
tion of  learned  men  in  the  west  of  Europe  against  the 
barbarians  and  ignorance  of  the  times.  The  Pope  was 
the  chief  of  this  confederacy;  and,  so  long  as  he  re- 
tained that  character,  his  power  was  just  and  irresistible. 
It  was  the  principal  means  of  preserving  for  us  and  for 
all  posterity  all  that  we  now  have  of  the  illumination 
of  past  ages.  But  as  soon  as  the  Pope  made  a  separation 
between  his  character  as  premier  clerk  in  Christendom 
and  as  a  secular  prince — as  soon  as  he  began  to  squab- 
ble for  towns  and  castles — then  he  at  once  broke  the 

(31) 


32  LEO  X.   AND  LUTHER. 

charm  and  gave  birth  to  a  revolution.  Everywhere, 
but  especially  throughout  the  North  of  Europe,  the 
breach  of  feeling  and  sympathy  went  on  widening;  so 
that  all  Germany,  England,  Scotland  and  other  countries, 
started,  like  giants  out  of  their  sleep,  at  the  first  blast 
of  Luther's  trumpet."  (Table  Talk,  July  24,  1832.) 

Coleridge  may  have  seen  a  special  providence  in  the 
rise  of  the  Papacy,  as  a  "confederation  of  learned  men 
in  the  west  of  Europe;"  but  we  can  not  see  the  special 
providence.  We.  see  the  Papacy,  with  all  its  worldly 
wisdom,  sagacity,  duplicity,  diplomacy;  with  all  its 
arrogance,  assumption  of  power,  corruptions  and  abomi- 
nations. We  also  see  its  downfall  at  the  approach  of 
Bible  knowledge,  apostolic  teaching  and  popular  edu- 
cation. 

The  age  immediately  preceding  the  Lutheran  Refor- 
mation was  characterized  by  the  dogmatic  system,  as 
elaborated  by  the  schoolmen  from  the  abundant  materials 
furnished  by  tradition  and  sanctioned  by  the  mongrel 
Church;  which  constituted  a  vast  body  of  mystic  and 
scholastic  doctrine,  and  which  every  man  of  the  least 
religious  pretensions  was  bound  to  accept  in  all  particu- 
lars, or  come  under  the  ban  of  excommunication.  The 
polity  of  the  mongrel  Church  lodged  all  ecclesiastical 
rule  in  the  hands  of  a  superior  class,  the  besotted  priest- 
hood, who  were  commissioned  as  the  indispensable  al- 
moners of  divine  grace.  The  worship  centered  in  the 
sacrifice  of  the  mass,  a  constantly  repeated  miracle 
wrought  by  the  hands  of  the  wily  and  winsome  priest. 
Justification  by  meritorious  works,  without  respect  to 
character  and  a  godly  life,  was  stereotyped  into  a  wicked 
dogma,  which  was  eating  out  the  vitals  of  all  religious 
life.  Human  merit  was  substituted  for  the  mercy  of 
God.  A  religion  of  external  performances,  which  con- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  33 

sistcd  in  quantity  rather  than  in  quality,  and  various 
modes  of  pretentious  abstinences,  with  the  institution 
of  monasticism  and  the  celibacy  of  the  priesthood,  were 
prominent  features  in  the  existing  order  of  things. 
According  to  Ullman  (Neformatoren  von  der  Reformation) 
the  masses,  pilgrimages,  fastings,  flagellations,  prayers 
to  saints,  homage  to  their  relics  and  images  and  similar 
features  so  prominent  in  medieval  mysticism,  which 
passed  as  piety,  illustrate  the  essential  character  of  the 
times. 

The  forerunners  of  the  Reformation  have  been  prop- 
erly divided,"  says  Prof.  Fisher,  quoting  from  Dr.  Ull- 
man, "into  two  classes.  The  first  of  them  consists  of 
the  men  who,  in  the  quiet  path  of  theological  research 
and  teaching,  or  by  practical  exertions  in  behalf  of  a 
contemplative,  spiritual  tone  of  piety,  were  undermining 
the  traditional  sj'Stem.  The  second  embraces  names 
who  are  better  known,  for  the  reason  that  they  at- 
tempted to  carry  out  their  ideas  practically  in  the  way 
of  effecting  ecclesiastical  changes.  The  first  class  are 
more  obscure,  but  were  not  less  influential  in  preparing 
the  ground  for  the  Reformation.  Protestantism  was  a 
return  to  the  Scriptures  as  the  authentic  source  of  Chris- 
tian knowledge,  and  to  the  principle  that  salvation,  that 
inward  peace,  is  not  from  the  Church  or  from  human 
works,  ethical  or  ceremonial,  but  through  Christ  alone, 
received  by  the  soul  in  an  act  of  trust.  Whoever, 
whether  in  the  chair  of  theology,  in  the  pulpit,  through 
the  devotional  treatise,  or  by  fostering  the  stud}-  of 
languages  and  of  history,  or  in  perilous  combat  with 
ecclesiastical  abuses,  drew  the  minds  of  men  to  the 
Scriptures  and  to  a  more  spiritual  conception  of  religion, 
was,  in  a  greater  or  less  measure,  a  reformer  before  the 
Reformation. 


THE  DAWN  OF  THE  REFORMATION. 


FROM  the  twelfth  century  down  to  the  dawn  of  the 
Reformation,  there  were  found  here  and  there,  especially 
in  Southern  France  and  Northern  Italy,  "anti-sacerdotal 
sects,"  who  indulged  in  vehement  invectives  against  the 
shameful  immoralities  of  the  priesthood  and  their  bane- 
ful usurpations  of  power.  Among  these  sects  in  Southern 
France,  we  may  mention  the  noted  Albigenses,  who 
vigorously  opposed  the  authority  of  ecclesiastical  tradi- 
tion and  of  the  hierarchy,  but  who  were  finally  crushed 
out  of  existence  by  means  of  a  bloody  and  heartless 
crusade,  instigated  by  Innocent  III.,  and  which,  through 
his  agency,  was  followed  up  by  the  iniquitous  Inquisi- 
tion, which  here  had  its  origin.  "Catharists"  was  a 
general  name  applied  to  these  anti-sacerdotal  sects. 
Succeeding  the  Albigenses,  there  appear  in  1170,  the 
Waldenses,  under  the  leadership  of  Peter  Waldo,  of 
Lyons.  Because  of  their  attachment  to  the  Scriptures, 
and  of  their  fiery  opposition  to  clerical  usurpation  and 
profligacy,  they  also  became  forerunners  of  the  Refor- 
mation. Disaffection  and  unrest,  and  a  stubborn  re- 
sistance against  the  aggressions  of  the  priesthood,  were 
experienced  in  all  quarters,  especially  among  the  poor 
and  dependent  classes. 

The  Inquisition  had  done  its  bloody  work  in  the  ex- 
tirpation of  all  such  heretics  as  the  Albigenses  and  the 
Waldenses.  More  radical  and  influential  reformers  have 

(34) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  35 

now  moved  to  the  front,  such  as  Huss,  Jerome  of  Prague 
and  John  Wickliffe.  But  the  theologians  of  Paris  made 
themselves  infamous  and  almost  outstripped  their  Papal 
antagonists,  during  the  sessions  of  the  Council  of  Con- 
stance, in  their  violent  treatment  of  Huss,  and  in  the 
alacrity  with  which  they  condemned  him  and  Jerome 
to  the  stake.  One  hundred  and  fifty  years  before  the 
days  of  Luther,  Wickliffe  proved  himself  a  formidable 
antagonist  to  the  pretensions  of  the  Papacy.  He  an- 
ticipated the  grand  reformation  with  a  knowledge  of 
the  religious  situation,  with  a  perspicuity  of  genius,  and 
by  apostolic  blows  of  radical  reform,  that  shook  the 
very  foundations  of  the  Papal  edifice.  He  set  aside 
Papal  decrees  by  a  direct  appeal  to  the  Holy  Scriptures. 
He  denies  transubstantiation;  he  boldly  asserts  that  in 
the  primitive  Church  there  were  only  two  classes  of 
church  officers;  denies  that  there  is  scriptural  authority 
for  the  rites  of  confirmation  and  extreme  unction;  ad- 
vocates non-interference  on  the  part  of  the  clergy  with 
civil  affairs  and  temporal  authority;  condemns  auricular 
confession ;  holds  that  the  exercise  of  the  power  to  bind 
and  loose  is  of  no  effect,  unless  it  conforms  to  the 
doctrine  of  Christ;  is  opposed  to  the  multiplied  ranks 
of  the  clergy  —  popes,  cardinals,  patriarchs,  monks, 
canons,  et.  al.;  repudiates  the  doctrine  of  indulgences 
and  supererogatory  merits,  the  doctrine  of  the  excel- 
lence of  poverty,  as  that  was  held  and  as  it  lay  at  the 
foundation  of  the  mendicant  orders;  and  he  sets  him- 
self against  artificial  church  music,  pictures  in  worship, 
consecration  with  the  use  of  oil  and  salt,  canonization, 
pilgrimages,  church  asylums  for  criminals,  and  the  celi- 
bacy of  the  clergj7.  These  facts  are  all  clearly  authenti- 
cated by  reliable  historians.  The  followers  of  Wickliffe 
were  called  Lollards.  It  is  a  remarkable  fact  that  Wick- 


36  THE  DAWN  OF  THE  REFORMATION. 

liffe  predicted  that  from  the  monks  themselves  there 
would  arise  men  who  would  abandon  their  false  inter- 
pretations of  Scriptures,  and,  returning  to  the  apostolic 
order  of  things,  would  reconstruct  the  Church  in  the 
Bpirit  of  Paul.  The  work  of  reform  as  inaugurated  by 
Wickliffe,  we  may  remark,  in  passing,  presents  many 
features  resembling  the  work  of  reform  as  inaugurated 
by  Thomas  and  Alexander  Campbell.  The  latter  was 
an  ardent  admirer  of  the  illustrious  Wickliffe.  It  was 
in  the  Council  of  Constance  that  Huss  asserted  the 
right  of  private  judgment.  This  was  going  behind  the 
Council;  and  for  his  temerity  he  was  commanded  to 
retract  his  avowals  of  opinion,  which  he  refused  to  do 
until  he  could  be  convinced  by  argument  and  by  cita- 
tions from  the  Scriptures,  that  his  sentiments  were  er- 
roneous. The  right  of  private  judgment  became  one 
of  the  prominent  and  distinctive  principles  of  Protest- 
antism. Other  reformers  sprung  up,  whom  we  can  not 
mention,  such  as  the  distinguished  and  eloquent  Savon- 
arola, who  lived  at  Florence,  where  he  carried  on  his 
work  of  moral  reform,  until  his  death  in  1498.  He  ex- 
posed the  demoralized  condition  of  the  mongrel  Church, 
and  for  laying  bare  the  rottenness  of  the  Papal  system, 
he  forfeited  his  life  under  the  flagitious  Alexander  VI., 
but  predicted  a  coming  reformation. 


THE  MYSTICS. 


THE  Reformation  of  the  sixteenth  century  was  pre- 
ceded by  a  school  of  men,  called  Mystics,  of  whom  the 
noted  Anselm  was  the  father.  The  characteristic  of 
the  Mystics  is  the  sensation  of  feeling,  rather  than  of 
believing;  the  preference  of  intuition  to  logic,  the  quest 
for  knowledge  through  light  imparted  to  feeling,  rather 
than  by  processes  of  the  intellect;  the  indwelling  of 
God  in  the  soul,  elevated  to  a  holy  calm  by  the  con- 
sciousness of  his  presence;  absolute  self-renunciation 
and  the  absorption  of  the  human  will  into  the  divine; 
silent  meditation  and  the  ecstatic  mood.  The  character- 
istic spirit  of  this  mystical  school,  which  was  a  recoil 
from  dogmatic  theology,  and  from  the  extravagant  use 
of  outward  sacraments  and  ceremonies,  was  illustrated 
by  Thomas  a  Kempis,  in  his  celebrated  work,  entitled 
"The  Imitation  of  Christ,"  which  it  is  said  has  probably 
had  a  larger  circulation  than  any  other  book  except  the 
Bible.  Luther  himself  was  more  or  less  influenced  by 
the  doctrines  of  the  Mystics,  especially  by  the  writings 
of  John  Tauler  and  Thomas  a  Kempis. 

The  Reformation  was  preceded  by  a  revival  of  learn- 
ing— a  new  era  of  intellectual  culture — in  which  three 
eminent  writers — Dante,  Petrarch  and  Boccaccio — made 
themselves  distinguished.  Scholasticism,  which  for  sev- 
eral hundred  years  had  been  dominant  in  the  medieval 
ages,  gradually  gave  way  as  books  began  to  multiply, 

(37) 


38  THE  MYSTICa 

and  as  the  Scriptures  continued  to  be  translated  into 
the  native  languages  of  the  people.  The  Schoolmen 
and  the  Mystics  began  to  retire  to  the  background  im- 
mediately upon  the  introduction  of  the  art  of  printing, 
and  as  distinguished  scholars,  coming  to  the  front, 
began  to  test  the  doctrinal  and  ecclesiastical  system  of 
that  age  by  a  translation  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament 
from  the  original,  the  original  fountain  of  truth  having 
been  oppressed  by  the  Papacy,  and  the  mass  of  the 
people  deprived  of  the  key  of  knowledge.  The  gigan- 
tic fabric  of  Latin  Christianity,  that  vast  receptacle  of 
idolatry  and  Pagan  superstition,  began  to  quake  at  the 
near  approach  of  intelligent  faith  and  reason,  and  of 
civil  and  religious  liberty.  The  Papacy  could  no  longer 
endure  the  light  of  investigation.  But  the  revival  of 
literature  in  Italy  was,  to  a  considerable  extent,  the  re- 
vival of  Paganism.  "Even  an  Epicurean  infidelity," 
says  Prof.  Fisher  in  his  History  of  the  Reformation,  "as 
to  the  foundation  of  religion,  which  was  caught  from 
Lucretius  and  from  the  dialogues  of  Cicero,  infected  a 
wide  circle  of  literary  men.  Preachers,  in  a  strain  of 
florid  rhetoric,  would  associate  the  names  of  Greek  and 
Roman  heroes  with  those  of  the  apostles  and  saints,  and 
with  the  name  of  the  Savior  himself.  If  an  example 
of  distinguished  piety  was  required,  reference  would  be 
made  to  Numa  Pompilius.  So  prevalent  was  disbelief 
respecting  the  fundamental  truths  of  natural  religion 
that  the  Council  of  the  Lateran,  under  Leo  X.,  felt 
called  upon  to  affirm  the  immortality  and  individuality 
of  the  soul."  It  appeared  as  if  the  gods  of  the  old 
mythology  had  risen  from  the  dead,  if  we  may  judge  by 
the  sentiments  of  the  poets  and  rhetoricians  of  that 
literary  revival,  "  while  in  the  minds  of  thinking  men 
Plato  and  Plotinus  had  supplanted  Paul  and  Isaiah." 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  39 

The  influence  of  the  classic  school  upon  the  Church  in 
Italy,  as  described  by  Guizot  (History  of  Civilization,  lect. 
xi.),  is  fearful  to  contemplate.  As  a  specimen  of  his 
delineation  of  the  crookedness  of  the  times,  he  says 
that  the  Church  in  Italy  "gave  herself  up  to  all  the 
pleasures  of  an  indolent,  elegant,  licentious  civilization  ; 
to  a  taste  for  letters,  the  arts,  and  social  and  physical 
enjoyments." 

On  the  principle  that  like  causes  produce  like  effects, 
may  not  the  study  of  the  same  classics  revive  a  love  for 
Pagan  literature  in  our  times;  and  is  it  not  now  the 
tendency  of  pulpit  rhetoricians,  as  they  come  from  our 
colleges  dripping  with  the  distillations  of  Pagan  philoso- 
phy, to  supplant  Paul  and  Isaiah  by  the  introduction  of 
Plato  and  Plotinus?  And  how  often  do  we  hear  college 
fledglings,  and  some  older  ones,  who  consider  themselves 
''advanced  thinkers,"  associating  the  names  of  Greek 
and  Roman  heroes  with  those  of  the  apostles  and  saints, 
and  even  with  the  name  of  the  Savior  himself. 

The  religious  condition  of  things  in  Germany,  at  the 
outbreak  of  the  Reformation,  was  far  different  from 
that  of  Italy.  Reuchlin  and  Erasmus,  two  of  the  most 
eminent  scholars  of  the  age,  taking  advantage  of  the 
revival  of  literature,  made  it  contribute  to  the  purifica- 
tion of  the  morals  of  the  people,  and  to  an  earnest  and 
vigorous  investigation  of  the  Scriptures.  These  were 
the  men  who  furnished  Luther,  the  great  champion  of 
the  Reformation,  with  the  literary  munitions  of  war 
that  crushed  the  dominion  of  the  Papacy,  and  which 
liberated  the  masses  from  ignorance  and  foul  superstition. 


LUTHER  AKD  THE  MAN  OF  SIN. 


THE  people  of  this  generation  have  a  just  right  to 
know  why  we  propose,  and  strenuously  labor  for,  a 
thorough  restoration  of  the  apostolic  order  of  thiugs, 
and  why,  religiously,  we  reject  all  human  authority  and 
accept  only  the  law  and  authority  of  Jesus  the  Christ. 
For  more  than  a  half  century  we  have  kept  this  grand 
proposition  before  the  eyes  of  all  men.  It  is  due  to  the 
rising  generation — doubly  due  to  our  own  children — 
that  we  should  furnish  the  most  substantial  reasons  for 
having  inaugurated  a  movement  as  radical  and  far-reach- 
ing as  that  which  was  inaugurated  by  Christ  and  his 
apostles.  We  propose  more  than  a  reformation  of  refor- 
mations. We  go  back  of  all  reformations,  and  plant 
ourselves  upon  apostolic  ground.  It  is  a  fact  patent  to 
all  men  acquainted  with  ecclesiastical  history,  that  there 
is  not  a  Protestant  denomination  in  existence  that  has 
entirely  emerged  from  the  great  apostasy,  of  1260  years' 
continuance,  and  that  has  effectively  cleared  itself  of  the 
mystic  influences  of  Spiritual  Babylon.  No  denomina- 
tion, however  respectable  it  may  appear  in  the  eyes  of 
the  world,  can  claim  identity  with  the  Church  of  Christ, 
as  founded  by  his  apostles,  as  long  as  it  countenances 
human  dogmas,  substitutes  theories  for  facts,  supplants 
the  law  and  authority  of  Christ  by  laws  of  expediency, 
changes  the  ordinances  of  the  Church,  mystifies  the 
design  of  the  ordinances,  bears  titles  which  the  Spirit 

(40) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  41 

never  authorized,  and  carnalizes  the  worship  of  the  true 
and  living  God. 

It  is  our  purpose,  in  these  essays,  to  show  the  origin 
and  drift  of  the  several  reformations  from  the  days  of 
Luther  down  to  the  present  time,  and  to  show  also,  in 
tracing  out  these  events,  that  not  one  of  the  so-called 
reformatory  movements  ever  resulted  in  the  full  restora- 
tion of  Apostolic  Christianity.  We  write  for  those  who 
neither  read  nor  investigate,  but  who  ought  to  read  and 
investigate.  Many  of  our  own  people,  which  statement 
includes  many  of  our  own  preachers,  are  not  posted  on 
these  questions  as  they  ought  to  he,  while  professing  at 
the  same  time  to  stand  upon  the  only  true  and  tenable 
ground. 

Luther  was  a  great  power  in  crushing  the  Man  of  Sin, 
but  he  did  not  succeed  in  grinding  him  to  powder. 
Luther  was  first  aroused  by  the  visible  presence  of  a 
corrupt  priesthood.  The  origin  of  the  Reformation  of 
the  sixteenth  century  was  quite  humble  and  somewhat 
indefinite.  Pope  Leo  X.  had  arranged  for  a  very  exten- 
sive sale  of  indulgences.  He  gave  out  as  a  pretext  for 
the  outrage  that  the  proceeds  of  the  sale  were  intended 
for  a  war  against  the  Turks  and  the  erection  of  St. 
Peter's  Church.  It  was  quite  generally  believed  that 
the  real  destination  of  the  money  was  to  defray  the  ex- 
orbitant expenditures  of  the  Pope's  court  and  to  serve 
as  a  marriage  dowry  of  his  sister.  Archbishop  Albert, 
of  Mentz,  a  man  whose  character  was  no  better  than 
that  of  Leo  X.,  authorized  the  sale  in  Germany  on  con- 
dition that  fifty  per  cent,  should  flow  into  his  own 
pocket.  Tetzel,  a  Dominican  friar,  carried  on  the  trade 
with  such  a  dash  of  effrontery  as  to  outrage  the  senti- 
ments of  thousands  of  honest  and  sincere  people. 
Luther,  then  a  young  monk  in  an  Augustiuian  convent, 
4 


42  LUTHER  AND  THE  MAN  OF  SIN. 

was  among  the  first  to  rise  against  this  profanation  of 
pure  religion,  and  to  conscientiously  protest  against  the 
abomination.  When  a  young  student,  he  had  been 
driven  by  his  anxiety  for  the  salvation  of  his  soul  into 
the  seclusion  of  a  convent.  After  long  doubts  and 
many  mental  troubles,  he  had  derived  from  a  profound 
study  of  the  Scriptures,  and  of  the  writings  of  Augus- 
tine and  Tauler,  the  consolatory  belief  that  man  is  to  be 
saved,  not  by  his  own  works  of  righteousness,  but  by 
faith  in  God  through  Jesus  Christ.  As  an  earnest  Chris- 
tian man,  who  had  taken  upon  himself  a  solemn  obliga- 
tion to  teach  a  pure  religion,  and  who,  as  we  have  reason 
to  believe,  sincerely  believed  in  the  Christianity  of  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  he  felt  himself  impelled  to  enter  an 
energetic  protest  against  the  daring  deeds  of  Tetzel.  In 
accordance  with  the  principles  of  the  Church  of  Rome, 
he  addressed  himself  to  several  neighboring  bishops, 
urging  them  to  stop  the  sale  of  indulgences;  but,  not 
heeding  his  appeal,  he  resolved  to  act  upon  his  own  ac- 
count. 

It  was  on  the  eve  of  All-Saints'  Day,  October  31,  1517, 
that  he  affixed  to  the  Castle  Church  of  Wittenberg  the 
celebrated  ninety-five  theses,  which  bold  act  has  gener- 
ally been  regarded  as  the  beginning  of  the  Lutheran 
Reformation.  But  both  Papal  and  Protestant  writers 
are  agreed  that  these  theses  involved  by  no  means,  on 
Luther's  part,  a  conscious  renunciation  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  doctrine.  Luther  himself  made  this  manifestly 
clear  by  his  subsequent  appeal  to  the  Pope,  and  also  by 
the  fact  that  he  was  attempting  the  reformation  and  not 
the  disorganization  of  the  Church.  His  opposition  to 
the  corruptions  of  Rome  was  but  a  reflex  of  public  opin- 
ion, which,  by  this  time,  had  become  wide-spread.  The 
Pope  became  alarmed,  and  was  startled,  as  by  an  elec- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  43 

trie  shock,  when  he  discovered  finally  that  the  humble 
and  obscure  monk,  whom  he  at  first  feigned  to  despise, 
had  sent  an  impulse  all  over  the  religious  world.  Im- 
mediate steps  were  taken  to  arrest,  if  possible,  the  prog- 
ress of  Luther's  revolutionary  movement.  At  first  the 
Pope  summoned  Luther  to  Rome ;  but  at  the  request  of 
the  University  of  Wittenberg,  and  the  elector  of  Sax- 
ony, the  concession  was  made  that  the  Papal  legate, 
Thomas  de  Vio  (better  known  in  history  as  Cajetanus), 
should  examine  Luther  in  a  paternal  and  conciliatory 
manner.  Luther's  characteristic  line  of  defense  was 
the  rejection  of  the  arguments  as  taken  from  the  Fath- 
ers and  the  scholastics,  and  the  demand  to  be  refuted  by 
arguments  cited  from  the  Bible.  After  hearing  that  the 
Pope  had  issued  a  fresh  Papal  bull  in  behalf  of  indulg- 
ences, Luther  changed  his  appeal  to  an  ecumenical  coun- 
cil. Soon  after  this  the  court  of  Rome  found  it  expedi- 
ent to  change  its  policy  with  Luther,  and  to  win  him 
back  by  compromise  and  kindliness.  The  Papal  Cham- 
berlain, Karl  Von  Miltitz,  a  native  of  Saxony,  was  so  far 
successful  that  Luther  promised  to  write  letters  in  which 
he  would  admonish  all  persons  to  be  obedient  and  re- 
spectful to  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  to  write  to  the 
Pope  to  assure  him  that  he  had  never  thought  of  in- 
fringing upon  the  rights  and  privileges  of  the  Mother 
Church.  History  informs  us  that  the  letter  was  actually 
indited;  its  language  is  replete  with  expressions  of  con- 
descension, and  it  exalts  the  Roman  Church  above  ev- 
ery thing  but  Christ  himself.  He  also  promised  to  dis- 
continue the  controversy  if  his  opponents  would  agree 
to  do  the  same.  But  only  a  brief  period  elapsed  before 
he  was  drawn  into  the  Disputation  of  Leipsic  (continu- 
ing from  June  27  to  July  15,  1519),  which  the  vain  glo- 
rified Dr.  Eck  had  originally  arranged  with  Carlstadt. 


44  LUTHER  AND  THE  MAN  OP  SIN. 

History  awards  to  Dr.  Eck  the  glory  of  having  proved 
himself  the  more  able  disputant,  but  Luther's  cause  was 
nevertheless  greatly  benefited  by  the  discussion.  The 
arguments  of  his  fiery  opponents  drove  Luther  onward 
to  a  more  decided  rejection  of  Romish  innovations. 
He  was  led  by  degrees  to  assert  boldly  that  the  Pope 
was  not  by  divine  right  the  universal  Bishop  of  the 
Church,  to  entertain  doubts  of  the  infallibility  of 
councils,  and  to  believe  that  not  all  the  Hussite 
doctrines  were  heretical. 

Great  men  soon  came  to  the  support  of  Luther,  and 
among  others,  Dr.  Melancthon,  one  of  tbe  greatest  schol- 
ars of  the  age.  The  conflict  between  Rome  and  Luther 
now  became  one  of  life  and  death.  Dr.  Eck  returned 
from  a  journey  to  Rome  with  a  Papal  bull,  which  de- 
clared Luther  a  heretic,  and  which  ordered  the  burning 
of  his  writings.  Luther,  on  the  other  hand,  systema- 
tized his  views  in  three  works,  all  of  which  appeared  in 
1520,  viz.:  To  his  Imperial  Majesty  and  the  Christian  No- 
bility of  the  German  Nation — On  the  Babylonian  Captivity 
of  the  Church — Sermon  on  the  Freedom  of  a  Christian 
Man.  The  culmination  finally  came,  when  (December 
10,  1520)  Luther  publicly  burnt  the  Papal  bull  with  the 
Papal  canon  law.  The  Pope  succeeded  in  prevailing 
upon  the  German  emperor  and  the  German  Diet  of 
"Worms  (1521)  to  proceed  against  the  great  heretic;  and 
when  Luther  firmly  refused  to  recant  and  persistently 
avowed  that  he  could  yield  to  nothing  but  the  Holy 
Scriptures  and  sound  argument,  he  was  placed  under 
the  ban  of  the  empire;  but  so  great  was  the  discontent 
in  Germany  with  corrupt  Rome,  that  the  same  assembly 
which  condemned  Luther  for  opposing  the  faith  of  their 
ancestors,  presented  101  articles  of  complaint  against 
the  Roman  See.  As  the  ban  of  the  empire  against 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  45 

Luther  imperiled  his  life,  he  was  persuaded  by  his 
friends  to  seclude  himself  in  the  Castle  of  Wartburg. 
Placed  beyond  the  turmoil  of  political  agitation,  he 
found  time  to  issue  several  powerful  polemical  essays 
against  auricular  confession,  against  monastic  vows, 
against  masses  for  the  dead,  and  against  the  new  idol  of 
the  Archbishop  of  Mentz.  After  his  return  from  Wart- 
burg,  Luther  gave  his  chief  attention  to  the  continua- 
tion of  his  translation  of  the  Bible  in  German,  which 
was  completed  in  1534,  and  which  was  a  master  produc- 
tion for  that  age  of  the  world,  while  Melancthon,  in  his 
celebrated  work  on  theological  science,  gave  to  the  the- 
ological leaders  of  the  new  order  of  things  a  hand-book 
of  doctrine.  Then  came  the  Augsburg  Confession,  by 
which  every  man  was  to  be  measured;  and,  having 
adopted  this  as  the  theological  measure  of  every  man, 
then  the  Bible  became  once  more  a  sealed  book,  then  a 
cessation  of  Bible  investigation,  and  finally  the  imposi- 
tion of  human  dogmas  and  ecclesiastical  contraction,  in 
which  condition  of  stagnation  the  Lutheran  Reforma- 
tion has  stood  ever  since,  but  with  an  expansion  of  many 
millions  of  nominal  members,  all  of  whom  were  made 
members  of  the  Lutheran  Church  in  infancy,  without 
faith  and  knowledge,  and  without  liberty  of  choice.  At 
the  Diet  of  Worms,  1521,  before  the  Augsburg  Confes- 
sion was  formulated  into  a  creed,  when  Luther  was  per- 
emptorily called  upon  to  recant,  he  replied  in  Latin: 
"Unless  I  shall  be  convinced  by  the  testimonies  of  the 
Scriptures  or  by  evident  reason  (for  I  believe  neither 
Pope  nor  councils  alone,  since  it  is  manifest  they  have 
often  erred  and  contradicted  themselves),  I  am  bound 
by  the  Scriptures  I  have  quoted,  and  my  conscience  is 
held  captive  by  the  "Word  of  God;  and  as  it  is  neither 
safe  nor  right  to  act  against  conscience,  I  can  not  and 


46  LUTHER  AND  THE  MAN  OF  SIN. 

will  not  retract  anything."  He  added  in  German: 
"Here  I  stand;  lean  not  otherwise;  God  help  me.  Amen." 
Memorable  words,  if  only  he  had  adhered  to  them. 
But  subsequently  he  took  an  active  part  in  forming  the 
constitution  of  the  Consistories.  He  was,  in  conjunc- 
tion with  other  ecclesiastics,  the  author  of  the  Marburg 
Articles  and  Schwabach  Articles  (1529),  which  furnished 
the  basis,  and  to  a  large  extent,  the  material,  both  doc- 
trinal and  verbal,  of  the  Augsburg  Confession,  in  1530, 
during  its  direct  preparation  and  presentation.  During 
his  conflicts  with  the  powers  of  Rome,  he  exhorted  his 
friends  not  to  call  themselves  Lutherans,  but  Christians, 
and  he  also  told  them  that  he  was  not  writing  his  tracts 
to  bring  them  to  him,  but  to  bring  them  to  the  Bible. 
In  dissolving  Church  and  State,  and  in  procuring  the 
civil  liberties  of  the  German  people,  as  well  as  the  liber- 
ties of  the  people  of  other  States,  the  Lutheran  Reforma- 
tion accomplished  great  and  lasting  good;  but,  relig- 
iously, as  soon  as  the  Augsburg  Confession  was  made  to 
occupy  the  place  of  the  Bible,  reformation  ceased,  and 
there  has  been  but  little  progress  in  that  direction  since. 
Luther  never  attempted  the  complete  restoration  of 
Apostolic  Christianity.  He  never  comprehended  such  a 
question,  which  is  made  the  more  evident  by  the  fact 
that  the  Augsburg  Confession  contains  doctrines  and 
dogmas  which  are  purely  of  Papal  origin,  notably  the 
dogma  of  Transubstantiation,  on  account  of  which,  as 
well  as  on  account  of  other  Romish  dogmas,  Zwingli 
and  other  reformers,  in  Switzerland,  separated  from  him, 
as  we  shall  show  in  our  next  article.  Though  the  great 
reformer  freed  himself  from  the  fetters  of  Papal  ecclesi- 
asticism,  and  severed  his  connection  with  the  despotism 
of  Rome,  it  is  nevertheless  a  fact  that  he  never  divested 
himself  entirely  of  the  mysticism  of  the  dark  ages,  and 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  47 

never  thoroughly  rid  himself  of  the  traditions  of  Rome. 
Hence  the  necessity  of  succeeding  reformatory  move- 
ments, not  one  of  which  effected  a  restoration  of  the 
apostolic  order  of  things,  neither  in  doctrine  nor  in 
practice,  as  we  shall  discover  in  our  future  investiga- 
tions. We  accept  the  good  that  preceding  reformers 
have  accomplished,  and  honor  those  who  have  rescued 
the  Bible  from  the  grasp  of  a  despotic  hierarchy,  but 
whatever  they  taught  contrary  to  God's  word,  we  reject. 
What  the  early  reformers  left  undone,  we  propose  to 
complete;  by  which  we  mean  an  entire  restoration  of 
the  ancient  order  of  things,  in  faith  and  practice,  in 
doctrine  and  discipline. 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  AUGSBURG  CONFESSION. 


HAVING  in  a  previous  number  given  the  origin  and  a 
brief  outline  of  the  Lutheran  Reformation,  we  next 
proceed  to  present  a  history  of  the  Augsburg  Confess- 
ion, which  we  derive  from  the  most  reliable  standard 
authorities: 

After  Charles  Y.  had  concluded  a  peace  with  France, 
he  summoned  a  German  Diet  to  meet  at  Augsburg, 
April  8,  1530.  The  decree  of  invitation  called  for  aid 
against  the  Turks,  who,  in  1529,  had  besieged  Vienna; 
it  also  promised  a  discussion  of  the  religious  questions 
of  the  time,  and  such  a  settlement  of  them  as  both  to 
abolish  existing  abuses  and  to  satisfy  the  demands  of 
the  Pope.  Elector  John,  of  Saxony,  who  received  this 
decree,  March  11,  directed  (March  14)  Luther,  Jonas, 
Bugenhagen  and  Melancthon  to  meet  in  Torgau,  and 
draw  up  a  summary  of  the  most  important  and  necr 
essary  articles  of  faith,  in  support  of  which  the  evan- 
gelical princes  and  states  should  combine.  These 
theologians,  as  we  shall  term  them,  drew  up  a  profes- 
sion of  their  faith,  the  ground-work  of  which  they 
found  in  the  seventeen  articles  which  had  been  prepared 
by  Luther  for  the  convention  at  Schwalbach,  and  fifteen 
other  articles,  which  had  been  drawn  up  at  the  theolog- 
ical conference  at -Marburg,  and  subsequently  presented 
to  the  Saxon  elector  John  at  Torgau.  The  first  draft 
made  by  the  four  theologians,  in  seventeen  articles,  was 

(48) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  49 

at  once  published,  and  elicited  a  joint  reply  from 
Wimpina,  Mensing,  Redoarfer  and  Dr.  Elgers,  which 
Luther  immediately  answered.  The  subject  of  the  con- 
troversy had  thus  become  generally  known.  Lutherr 
Jonas  and  Melancthon  were  invited  by  the  Saxon 
elector  to  accompany  him  to  Augsburg.  However, 
subsequently,  it  was  deemed  best  for  Luther's  safety  to 
leave  him  behind.  Melancthon,  soon  after  his  arrival 
at  Augsburg,  completed  the  Confession,  and  gave  to  it 
the  title  Apologia.  On  the  llth  of  May  he  sent  it  to 
Luther,  who  was  then  at  Coburg,  and  on  the  15th  of 
May  he  received  from  Luther  an  answer  of  approval. 
Several  alterations  were  suggested  to  Melancthon  in  his 
conference  with  Jonas,  the  Saxon  Chancellor  Brack,  the 
conciliatory  Bishop  Stadion  of  Augsburg,  and  the  Im- 
perial Secretary  Valdes.  To  the  latter,  upon  his  re- 
quest, seventeen  articles  were  handed  by  Melancthon, 
with  the  consent  of  the  Saxon  elector,  and  he  was  to 
have  a  preliminary  discussion  concerning  them  with 
the  Papal  legate  Pimpinelli.  Upon  the  opening  of  the 
Diet,  June  20,  the  so-called  evangelical  theologians  who 
were  present — Melancthon,  Jonas,  Agricola,  Brcnz, 
Schnepf  and  others — presented  the  Confession  to  the 
elector.  The  latter,  on  June  23,  had  it  signed  by  the 
evangelical  princes  and  representatives  of  cities  who 
were  present,  viz:  John,-  elector  of  Saxony;  Gorge, 
margrave  of  Brandenburg;  Enerst,  duke  of  Lunenburg; 
Philip,  landgrave  of  Hesse;  John  Frederick,  duke  of 
Saxe;  Francis,  duke  of  Lunenburg;  Wolfgang,  prince 
of  Anhalt;  and  the  magistrates  of  Nuremberg  and 
Reutlinger. 

The  emperor  had  ordered  the  Confession  to  bo  pre- 
sented to  him  at  the  next  session,  June  24;  but  when 
the  evangelical  princes  asked  for  permission  to  read  it, 
5 


50  ORIGIN  OF  THE  AUGSBURG  CONFESSION. 

their  petition  was  refused,  and  efforts  were  made  to  pre- 
vent the  public  reading  of  the  document  altogether. 
The  evangelical  princes  declared,  however,  that  they 
would  not  part  with  the  Confession  until  its  reading 
should  be  allowed.  The  25th  of  the  month  was  then 
fixed  as  the  day  of  its  presentation.  In  order  to  exclude 
the  people,  the  little  chapel  of  the  Episcopal  Palace  was 
appointed  in  the  place  of  the  spacious  City  Hall,  where 
the  meetings  of  the  Diet  were  held.  In  this  chapel  the 
Protestant  princes  assembled  on  the  appointed  day, 
June  25,  1530.  The  Saxon  Chancellor  Briick,  held  in 
his  hands  the  Latin,  Dr.  Christian  Bayer,  the  German 
copy.  They  stepped  into  the  middle  of  the  august  as- 
sembly, and  all  the  Protestant  princes  rose  from  their 
seats,  but  were  instantly  commanded  to  sit  down.  The 
emperor  wished  to  hear  the  Latin  copy  read  first,  but 
the  elector  replied  that  they  were  on  German  ground  : 
whereupon  the  emperor  consented  to  the  reading  of  the 
German  copy,  which  was  done  by  Dr.  Bayer.  The 
reading  lasted  from  four  to  six  o'clock.  The  reading 
being  completed,  the  emperor  ordered  both  copies  to  be 
given  to  him.  The  German  copy  he  handed  to  the 
Archbishop  of  Mayence,  the  Latin  he  carried  with  him 
to  Brussels.  Neither  of  these  copies  is  now  extant. 
The  emperor  promised  to  take  this  "highly -important 
matter"  into  serious  consideration,  and  make  known 
his  decision;  in  the  meanwhile  the  Confession  was  not 
to  be  printed  without  imperial  permission.  The  Prot- 
estant princes  promised  to  comply  with  this  wish;  but 
when,  soon  after  the  reading,  an  erroneous  edition  of 
the  Confession  appeared,  it  became  necessary  to  have 
both  the  German  and  the  Latin  texts  published,  which 
work  was  done  through  Melancthon.  On  June  27  the 
Confession  was  given,  in  the  presence  of  the  whole  as- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  51 

sembly,  to  the  Roman  Catholic  theologians  to  be  re- 
futed. The  most  prominent  among  them  were  Eck, 
Faber,  Wimpina,  Cochlaeus  and  Dietenberger.  Before 
they  got  through  with  their  work  a  letter  was  received 
from  Erasmus,  who  had  been  asked  for  his  opinion  by 
Cardinal  Campegius,  recommending  caution,  and  the 
concession  of  the  Protestant  demands  concerning  the 
marriage  of  the  priests,  monastic  vows  and  the  Lord's 
Supper. 

O;i  July  12  the  Roman  Catholic  "Confutation"  was 
presented,  which  so  displeased  the  emperor  that  "of 
280  leaves,  only  12  remained  whole."  A  new  "Confu- 
tation" was  therefore  prepared  and  read  to  the  Diet, 
August  3,  by  the  imperial  secretary  Schweiss.  No 
copy  of  it  was  given  to  the  "evangelical  members"  of 
the  Diet,  and  it  was  not  published  until  1573,  by 
Fabricius.  Immediately  after  the  reading  of  the  Con- 
futation, the  Protestants  were  commanded  to  conform  to 
it.  Negotiations  for  effecting  a  compromise  were  begun 
by  both  parties,  but  led  to  no  practical  result.  oSTego- 
tiations  between  the  Lutherans  and  the  Zwinglians 
were  equally  fruitless.  Zwiuglias — anglicized  Zwingle 
— had  sent  to  the  emperor  a  memorial,  dated  July  4, 
and  Bucer,  Capito  and  Hedio  had  drawn  up,  in  the 
name  of  the  cities  of  Strausburg,  Constance,  Memmin- 
gen  and  Lindau,  the  Confessio  Tetrapolitana,  which  was 
presented  to  the  emperor  July  11.  Neither  of  these 
two  Confessions  was  read,  and  both  were  rejected. 

Melancthon,  at  the  request  of  the ' '  evangelical  princes" 
and  cities,  prepared  an  "Apology  of  the  Confession"  in 
opposition  to  the  Roman  Catholic  "Confutation,"  which 
was  presented  by  the  Chancellor  Briick,  September  22, 
to  the  emperor,  who  refused  to  receive  it.  Subsequently 
Melancthon  received  a  copy  of  the  "Confutation," 


52  ORIGIN  OF  THE  AUGSBURG  CONFESSION. 

which  led  to  many  alterations  in  the  first  draft  of  the 
Apology.  It  was  then  published  in  Latin,  and  in  a 
German  translation  by  Jonas  (Wittenberg,  1531).  A 
controversy  subsequently  arose,  in  consequence  of 
which  Melancthon,  after  1540,  made  considerable  alter- 
ations in  the  original  Augsburg  Confession,  altering, 
especially  in  Article  X.,  the  statement  of  the  doctrine 
of  the  Lord's  Supper  in  favor  of  the  view  of  the  Re- 
formers. Melancthon,  who  had  already  been  charged 
with  "crypto-Calvinism"  (concealed  Calvinism),  was 
severely  attacked  on  account  of  these  alterations;  yet 
the  "Confessio  Variata"  remained  in  the  ascendency 
until  1580,  when  the  Confessio  Invariata  was  put  into 
the  " Concordienbuch"  in  its  place,  and  thus  the  unal- 
tered Confession  has  come  to  be  generally  regarded  as 
the  standard  of  the  Lutheran  churches.  It  is  but  just 
to  say,  however,  that  the  altered  Confession  has  not 
ceased  to  find  advocates,  and  several  branches  of  the 
Lutheran  Church  have  even  abrogated  the  authorita- 
tive character  of  the  Confession,  and  do  not  demand 
from  their  clergy  a  belief  in  all  its  doctrines. 

And  this  is  how  the  Augsburg  Confession  struggled 
into  existence.  The  following  table  of  the  contents  of 
the  Confession  and  of  the  Apology  will  give  the  reader 
an  idea  of  a  religious  system  of  things  that,  at  this  time, 
probably  wields  an  influence,  directly  and  indirectly, 
over  40,000,000  people. 

PART  I.  1.  Acknowledges  four  oecumenical  councils: 
2.  Declares  original  sin  to  consist  wholly  in  concupis- 
cence: 3.  Contains  the  substance  of  the  Apostles' 
Creed:  4.  Declares  that  justification  is  the  effect  of 
faith,  exclusive  of  good  works:  5.  Declares  the  word 
of  God  and  the  sacraments  to  be  the  means  of  convey- 
ing the  Holy  Spirit,  but  never  without  faith :  6.  That 
faith  must  produce  good  works  purely  in  obedience  to 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  53 

God,  and  not  in  order  to  the  meriting  justification  :  7. 
The  true  church  consists  of  the  godly  only :  8.  Allows 
the  validity  of  the  sacraments,  though  administered  by 
the  evil  one;  9.  Declares  the  necessity  of  infant  bap- 
tism: 10.  Declares  the  real  presence  in  the  Eucharist 
continued  with  the  elements  only  during  the  period  of 
receiving:  11.  Declares  absolution  to  be  necessary,  but 
not  so  particular  confession :  12.  Declares  against  the 
Anabaptists:  13.  Requires  actual  faith  in  all  who  re- 
ceive the  sacraments:  14.  Forbids  to  teacli  in  the 
church,  or  to  administer  the  sacraments,  without  being 
lawfully  called:  15.  Orders  the  observance  of  the  holy 
days  and  ceremonies  of  the  church:  16.  Of  civil  mat- 
ters and  marriage:  17.  Of  the  resurrection,  last  judg- 
ment, heaven  and  hell:  18.  Of  free  will:  19.  That 
God  is  not  the  author  of  sin:  20.  That  good  works 
are  not  altogether  unprofitable:  21.  Forbids  the  invo- 
cation of  saints. 

PART  II.  1.  Enjoins  communion  in  both  kinds,  and 
forbids  the  procession  of  the  holy  sacrament:  2.  Con- 
demns the  law  of  celibacy  of  priests :  3.  Condemns  pri- 
vate masses,  and  enjoins  that  some  of  the  congregation 
shall  communicate  with  the  priest:  4.  Against  the 
necessity  of  auricular  confession:  5.  Against  tradition 
and  human  ceremonies:  6.  Condemns  monastic  vows: 
7.  Discriminates  between  civil  and  religious  power,  and 
declares  the  power  of  the  church  to  consist  only  in 
preaching  and  administering  the  sacraments. 

These  are  briefly  the  facts  which  show  the  origin, 
gestation  and  birth  of  the  Augsburg  Confession.  The 
intelligent  Bible  reader  can  easily  tell  how  much  of  this 
theological  medley  is  Papal,  how  much  Protestant,  how 
much  tradition,  how  much  human  speculation,  and  how 
much  apostolic  teaching.  To  say  nothing  of  the  sinful- 
ness  of  making  the  creed,  many  of  its  doctrines  arc  pos- 
itive contradictions  of  the  word  of  God,  and  wholly 
subversive  of  Bible  teaching.  The  reader  will  have 
noticed,  in  the  history  of  the  Confession  just  given, 


54  ORIGIN  OF  THE  AUGSBURG  CONFESSION. 

that  civil  rulers  had  about  as  much  to  do  in  producing 
the  creed  as  the  reformers  themselves.  The  formation 
of  this  Augsburg  Confession  cut  oft'  all  further  investi- 
gation of  the  Scriptures,  and  forever  stereotyped  the 
faith  of  its  adherents.  By  the  doctrines  of  this  Confes- 
sion it  will  be  seen  that  Luther  remained  partly  a 
Roman  Catholic  as  long  as  he  lived,  and  it  was  because 
of  this  fact  that  Zwiugle,  as  we  shall  see  further  on, 
with  other  reformers  in  Switzerland,  separated  from 
Luther,  and  framed  another  confession  in  harmony 
with  their  belief.  Creedism,  as  the  reader  will  have 
perceived,  began  at  the  very  point  where  reformation 
ceased.  And  hence  as  long  as  creeds  exist,  and  as  long 
as  men  prefer  creeds  in  lieu  of  the  word  of  God,  there 
can  be  no  Christian  union  upon  the  basis  of  the  Script- 
ures, so  far  as  creed  lovers  are  concerned. 


REFORMATION  IN  SWITZERLAND. 


ULRICII  ZWINGLE  was  the  founder  of  Protestantism  in 
Switzerland.  He  was  a  man  of  fine  education  and  of 
extensive  learning.  lie  was  educated  in  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church.  He  possessed  a  bright  intellect,  was 
a  great  lover  of  literature,  was  early  in  life  distinguished 
for  his  love  of  truth,  and  devoted  himself  intensely  to 
an  investigation  of  the  Scriptures.  Like  Luther,  wit- 
nessing the  corruptions  of  the  clergy,  and  discovering 
dogmas  and  traditions  not  found  in  the  Word  of  God, 
such  as  the  worship  of  the  Virgin  Mary  ami  the  hideous 
doctrine  of  indulgences,  he  attempted  a  work  of  reform 
in  the  bosom  of  the  Church.  He  was  soon  charged 
with  preaching  heresy,  which  the  Papal  powers  re- 
garded as  subversive  of  the  established  order  of  things. 
In  a  conference  held  at  Zurich,  called  at  his  own  request, 
January  29,  1523,  in  the  presence  of  an  assembly  of 
more  than  six  hundred  men,  he  defended  sixty-seven 
propositions,  which  were  leveled  against  the  system  of 
Romanism.  In  his  defense  against  the  charge  of  heresy, 
he  substituted  the  authority  of  the  gospel  for  the  au- 
thority of  the  Church;  he  declared  the  Church  to  be 
the  communion  of  the  faithful,  who  have  no  head  but 
Christ;  he  maintained  that  salvation  is  through  faith  in 
Christ  as  the  only  priest  and  intercessor;  he  rejected  the 
Papacy  and  the  mass,  the  invocation  of  Baints,  justifica- 
tion by  works,  fasts,  festivals,  pilgrimages,  monastic 


56  REFORMATION  IN  SWITZERLAND. 

orders  and  the  priesthood,  auricular  confession,  absolu- 
tion, indulgences,  penances,  purgatory  and  indeed  all 
the  characteristic  peculiarities  of  the  Romish  Church. 
In  another  disputation,  before  a  much  larger  assembly, 
on  the  26th  of  October  following,  he  obtained  a  decree 
of  the  council  against  the  use  of  images  and  the  sacrifice 
of  the  mass. 

By  these  statements  it  will  be  seen  that  Zwingle,  as  a 
clear-headed  reformer,  and  as  one  capable  of  making 
clean-cut  distinctions  between  the  teaching  of  the  Bible 
and  the  Traditions  of  Rome,  was  in  advance  of  Luther. 
In  1525,  he  published  his  chief  work,  entitled  a  "Com- 
mentary on  True  and  False  Religion,"  and  also  a  treatise 
on  original  sin.  The  tenets  he  published  are  subtantially 
the  same  as  those  adopted  by  the  Protestant  Churches 
general!}'.  In  his  philosophy  he  was  a  predestinarian 
of  an  extreme  type,  transcending  both  Augustine  and 
Calvin.  lie  did  not  confine  the  illumination  of  the 
Spirit  within  the  circle  of  revealed  religion,  nor  do  his 
adherents  of  the  present  age,  or  to  those  who  receive 
the  word  of  God  and  the  "sacraments."  He  held  that 
the  virtues  of  heathen  sages  and  heroes  are  due  to  the 
presence  of  divine  grace,  and  asserted,  for  example,  that 
Socrates  was  more  pious  and  holy  than  all  Dominicans 
and  Franciscans.  -"He  had  busied  himself,"  says 
Neander,  "with  the  study  of  antiquity,  for  which  he 
had  a  predilection,  and  had  not  the  right  criterion  for 
distinguishing  the  ethical  standing-point  of  Christianity 
from  that  of  the  ancients."  From  Zurich  the  Reforma- 
tion spread,  and  in  a  short  time  Zwingle  found  in 
(Ecolampadius  as  great  a  counselor  and  leader,  as 
Luther  had  found  in  the  distinguished  and  scholarly 
Mehmcthon.  The  authority  of  the  Papal  system  never 
had  the  same  deep-set  hold  upon  Zwingle  as  it  had  upon 


KEFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  57 

Luther,  a  question,  however,  which  is  not  necessary  to 
discuss  here,  as  we  are  only  aiming  to  present  a  histori- 
cal connection  of  things  and  events.  When  Luther  was 
put  under  the  ban  of  the  Church,  Zwiugle,  as  we  learn 
from  Ranke,  the  German  historian,  was  still  the  recipient 
of  a  pension  from  the  Pope.  When  Luther  at  the  Diet 
of  Worms,  in  the  face  of  Papal  princes  and  the  legates 
of  Rome,  refused  to  submit  to  the  authority  of  the  Pope, 
Zwingle  had  not  yet  been  seriously  molested.  As  late  as 
1523  he  received  a  complimentary  letter  from  Pope 
Adrian  VI. — facts  which  go  to  show  that  the  reforma- 
tions effected  in  the  sixteenth  century  were  only  partial, 
and  of  course  incomplete,  and  a  fact  which  we  desire 
our  contemporaries  to  understand,  in  view  of  the  work 
in  which  we  are  engaged. 

Finally  there  broke  out  the  great  controversy  on  the 
dogma  of  Transubstantiation  between  the  Lutheran  and 
8  \visa  reformers.  Luther  did  not  obtain  this  dogma 
from  the  apostolic  record,  but  from  theologians  of  the 
Latin  Church — from  Radbcrt,  of  the  ninth  century,  from 
the  leading  schoolmen  of  the  thirteenth  century,  which 
was  made  an  article  of  faith  by  the  fourth  Laterau 
Council,  in  1215,  under  Innocent  III.  The  reformers,  as 
a  class,  with  one  consent,  denied  this  dogma,  "together 
with  the  associated  doctrine  of  the  sacrificial  character 
of  the  Eucharist."  But  Luther  stoutly  affirmed  the 
actual,  corporate  presence  of  the  glorified  body  and 
blood  of  Christ,  in  connection  with  the  bread  and  wine, 
so  that  the  body  and  blood,  in  some  mysterious  way,  are 
received  by  the  communicant,  whether  he  be  a  believer 
or  an  unbeliever.  Luther  did  not  hold  that  the  heavenly 
body  of  Christ,  which  is  offered  and  received  in  the 
"sacrament,"  occupies  space;  yet  it  is  received  by  all 
who  partake  of  the  bread  and  wine — not  a  portion  of 


58  REFORMATION  IX  SWITZERLAND. 

the  body,  but  the  entire  Christ  by  each  communicant. 
It  is  received,  in  some  proper  sense,  with  the  mouth. 
"We  have  quoted  from  De  Wette,  with  the  German  be- 
fore us.  Zwingle  denied  that  the  body  of  Christ  is 
present,  in  any  sense,  in  the  "sacrament,"  but,  with  his 
followers,  he  was  more  and  more  disposed  to  attach  im- 
portance to  a  spiritual  presence  in  the  institution.  This 
belief  Calvin  emphasized  and  added  the  positive  asser- 
tion of  a  direct  influence  upon  the  believing  communi- 
cant, which  flows  from  Christ  through  the  medium  or 
instrumentality  of  his  human  nature.  "The  Word  and 
the  Sacraments  Luther  had  made  the  criteria  of  the 
Church.  On  upholding  them  in  their  just  place,  every- 
thing that  distinguished  his  reform  from  enthusiasm  or 
rationalism  depended.  He  had  never  thought  of  for- 
saking the  dogmatic  system  of  Latin  Christianity  in  its 
earlier  and  purer  days,  and  he  looked  with  alarm  on 
what  struck  him  as  a  rationalistic  innovation."  At  the 
Conference  of  Marburg,  in  1529,  which  was  called  with 
a  view  of  reconciling  the  disaffected  parties,  when  the 
theologians  sat  by  a  table,  the  Saxons  on  one  side  and 
Swiss  on  the  opposite  side,  Luther  wrote  upon  the  table 
with  chalk  his  text:  " Hoc  est  meum  corpus"  (this  is 
my  body),  and  resolutely  refused  to  budge  an  iota  from 
the  literal  sense. 


ORIGIN  OF   THE  HEIDELBERG  CONFESSION". 


As  a  result  of  the  controversy  between  the  Lutheran 
reformers  and  the  Swiss  reformers,  we  have  the  Heidel- 
berg Catechism,  the  property  of  the  Reformed  Church. 
Its  name  is  derived  from  the  city  in  which  it  was 
compiled  and  first  printed.  It  is  also  sometimes  styled 
the  Palatinate  Catechism,  from  the  territory  (the  Palati- 
nate) of  the  Prince  (Frederick  III.)  under  whose  auspices 
it  was  prepared.  Soon  after  the  introduction  of  Prot- 
estantism into  the  Palatinate  in  1546,  the  controversy 
between  Lutherans  and  Calvinists  broke  out,  and  for 
years,  especially  under  the  Elector  Otto  lleinrich  (1556- 
59),  it  raged  with  great  violence  in  Heidelberg.  Fred- 
erick III.  who  came  into  power  in  1559,  adopted  the 
Calvinistic  view  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  and  favored  that 
side  of  the  question  with  all  his  princely  power.  He 
reorganized  the  Sapienz  College  (founded  by  his  pre- 
decessor) as  a  theological  school,  and  placed  at  its  head 
(1562)  Zacharias  Ursinus,  a  pupil  and  friend  of 
Melancthon,  who  had  adopted  the  Reformed  opinions. 
In  order  to  put  an  end  to  religious  disputes  in  his 
dominions,  he  determined  to  put  forth  a  Catechism,  a 
Confession  of  Faith,  and  laid  the  responsibility  of 
preparing  it  upon  Ursinus  and  Caspar  Olcvianus,  for  a 
time  professor  in  the  University  of  Heidelberg,  then 
court-preacher  to  Frederick  III.  They  made  use  of 
the  catechetical  literature  then  in  existence,  especially 

(59) 


60  ORIGIN  OF  THE  HEIDELBERG  CONFESSION. 

of  the  catechisms  of  Calvin  and  John  &  Lasco.  Each 
prepared  sketches  or  drafts,  and  "  the  final  preparation 
was  the  work  of  both  these  theologians,  with  the  constant 
co-operation  of  Frederick  III.  Ursinus  has  always  been 
regarded  as  the  chief  author,  as  he  was  afterwards  the 
principal  defender  and  interpreter  of  the  Catechism; 
still,  it  would  appear  that  the  nervous  German  style,  the 
division  into  three  parts  (as  distinguished  from  the  five 
parts  in  the  Catechism  of  Calvin,  and  the  previous  draft 
of  Ursinus),  and  the  genial  warmth  and  unction  of  the 
whole  work,  are  chiefly  due  to  Olevianus."  (Schaff,  in 
Am.  Pres.  Rev.  July,  1863,  p.  379.)  Philip  Schaff,  of 
JSTew  York,  is  the  acknowledged  leader  of  the  Reformed 
Church  in  America.  When  the  Catechism  was  com- 
pleted, Frederick  laid  it  before  a  synod  of  the  superin- 
tendents of  the  Palatinate,  December,  1562,  and  after  a 
careful  examination  it  was  duly  approved.  Dr.  SchaiF 
observes,  in  the  same  Review  from  which  we  have  already 
quoted,  that  "the  Catechism  is  a  true  expression  of  the 
convictions  of  its  authors,  but  it  communicates  only  so 
much  of  these  as  is  in  harmony  with  the  public  faith  of 
the  Church,  and  observes  a  certain  reticence  or  reserva- 
tion and  moderation  on  such  doctrines  (as  the  twofold 
predestination),  which  belong  rather  to  scientific  theology 
and  private  conviction  than  to  a  public  Church  confession 
and  the  instruction  of  youth." 

The  Heidelberg  Catechism  contains  substantially  the 
same  tenets,  dogmas,  traditions,  speculations  and  private 
opinions  that  are  found  in  all  Protestant  creeds,  except 
in  governmental  affairs.  In  common  with  all  creeds, 
whether  Romanist  or  Protestant,  it  teaches  infant  baptism 
and  sprinkling.  The  body  of  people  which  it  represents, 
is  called  the  Reformed  Church,  arid  this  Reformed 
Church  is  regarded  by  its  theologians  and  admirers  as  a 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  61 

decided  improvement  upon  the  Lutheran  Church ;  that 
is  to  say,  there  is  not  as  much  Romanism  in  the  Heidel- 
berg Catechism  as  there  is  in  the  Augsburg  Confession. 
The  theologians  and  princes  of  Germany  and  Switzerland 
began  reformation  with  the  Bible,  and  ended  their  work 
by  the  substitution  of  Creeds— Confessions  of  Faith — 
Symbols  of  Faith — Church  Standards,  etc.  Taking  the 
Bible  as  their  guide,  they  beat  a  retreat  from  the  mystic 
realms  of  Papal  Babylon,  but  had  not  gone  far  until  the 
leaders  commanded  a  halt,  when  they  went  to  work, 
while  still  under  the  potent  influence  of  Rome,  and 
formulated  Confessions  of  Faith;  and,  wedded  to  these 
human  inventions,  as  their  supporters  now  are,  they 
still  dwell  within  the  confines  of  old  Babylon.  If 
not  ecclesiastically  under  the  power  of  the  "  Mother 
Church,"  they  are  religiously  and  spiritually  of  the  same 
affinities.  None  of  these  creeds,  whether  Catholic  or 
Protestant,  tells  a  man  how  to  become  a  Christian.  They 
tell  a  man  how  he  may  become  a  Catholic,  a  Lutheran, 
a  Reformer,  an  Episcopalian,  a  Presbyterian,  a  Methodist, 
a  Baptist,  perchance.  There  is  not  a  Confession  of  Faith 
in  existence  that  ever  saved  a  soul.  As  human  com- 
positions, one  is  just  as  full  of  light  and  knowledge  as 
another,  and  just  as  efficacious  in  the  salvation  of  the 
soul.  They  all  originated  in  the  councils  of  men;  they 
were  digested  in  the  heat  of  human  passions;  they  were 
concocted  and  planned  by  envious  and  rival  theologians; 
they  became  the  symbols — the  insignia — of  rival  princes; 
they  have  always  engendered  strife,  hatred,  malice, 
bigotry,  intolerance  and  persecution,  and  will  continue 
to  do  so  until  the  end  of  time.  There  is  no  Christian 
love  in  them;  there  is  nothing  in  them  that  will  unite 
the  people  of  God,  and  make  them  one  people.  The 
mind  of  God  is  not  found  in  them,  and  the  spirit  of 


62  ORIGIN  OF  THE  HEIDELBERG  CONFESSION. 

Christ  does  not  breathe  through  them.  They  confuse 
the  human  mind;  they  divide  the  counsels  of  Christians; 
they  paralyze  the  power  of  truth;  they  make  a  fable  of 
the  gospel;  they  mock  the  prayers  of  the  Savior;  they 
make  void. the  law  of  God;  they  infuse  the  spirit  of 
sectarianism;  they  cramp  the  human  intellect;  they  place 
insuperable  barriers  between  those  seeking  love  and 
unity  upon  the  basis  of  the  Bible. 

In  view  of  these  facts,  and  many  more  yet  to  be  pro- 
duced, let  our  brethren  understand  that  our  mission  is 
not  yet  ended,  but,  on  the  contrary,  only  fairly  begun. 
We  have  no  human  creed  to  defend.  The  Bible,  and 
the  Bible  only,  is  our  rule  of  faith  and  practice.  The 
word  of  God  only  is  the  man  of  our  counsel.  All  creeds 
must  be  crushed  under  the  weight  of  divine  authority. 
"The  unity  of  the  Spirit  in  the  bond  of  peace,"  must 
destroy  all  sectism.  There  must  be  but  one  fold  and 
one  Shepherd.  "We  are  set  for  the  defense  of  the  gospel 
of  the  Son  of  God,  and  we  propose  to  walk  in  the  old 
paths.  "We  propose  the  restoration  of  the  apostolic 
order  of  things.  To  this  work  we  consecrate  our  life's- 
blood.  Upon  this  altar  we  lay  our  all.  "We  trust  that 
all  those  who  have  been  called  into  this  marvelous  light, 
will  stand  firm,  and  work,  and  contend  for  the  faith, 
and  show  themselves  men  in  the  highest  sense  of  the 
word,  and  never,  never,  yield  an  iota  of  the  truth. 


JOHN  CALVIN  AND  CALVINISM. 


IT  is  not  our  purpose,  nor  is  it  necessary  to  the  end 
we  have  in  view,  to  trace  the  Lutheran  Reformation  as 
it  spread  all  through  the  Scandinavian  kingdom,  pene- 
trated the  Slavonic  nations,  and  took  Hungary  captive. 
We  shall  next  have  something  to  say  about  John  Calvin 
and  his  theology. 

In  French  Switzerland,  the  reformatory  movement 
began  in  1526,  in  the  French  parts  of  the  cantons  Berne 
and  Biel,  where  the  principles  of  reform  were  preached 
by  "William  Farel,  a  native  of  France.  In  1530,  he  es- 
tablished the  Reformation  in  Neufchatel.  A  beginning 
was  made  in  Geneva  as  early  as  1528;  in  1534,  after  a 
religious  conference  held  at  the  suggestion  of  the  people 
of  Berne,  in  which  Farcl  defended  the  Reformation, 
public  worship  was  granted  to  those  who  belonged  to 
the  Reformed  branch ;  rapid  progress  was  then  made 
through  the  zeal  of  Farel,  Froment  and  Viret;  and  in 
1535,  after  another  disputation,  the  Papacy  was  abol- 
ished by  the  council  and  the  doctrines  of  the  Reforma- 
tion adopted.  In  1536  John  Calvin  arrived  in  Geneva, 
and  was  induced  by  Farel  to  remain  in  the  city  and  to 
aid  him  in  his  struggle  against  a  party  of  free  thinkers, 
who  called  themselves  Spirituals.  In  October  of  the 
same  year  he  took  part  with  Farcl  and  Viret  in  a  relig- 
ious disputation  held  at  Lausanne,  which  resulted  in 
gaining  over  the  Pays-de-Vaud  to  the  cause  of  the 

(63) 


G4  JOHN  CALVIX  AND  CALVINISM. 

Reformation.  In  1538  both  Farcl  and  Calvin  were 
banished  by  the  council,  which  had  taken  offense  at  the 
very  strict  Church  discipline  introduced  by  the  reform- 
ers. Soon,  however,  the  friends  of  the  Reformation  re- 
gained the  ascendency,  and  Calvin  was  recalled  in  1541, 
while  Farel  remained  in  ]^eufchatel.  For  several  years 
Calvin  was  put  under  the  necessity  of  sustaining  a  des- 
perate struggle  against  his  opponents,  but  in  1555  they 
were  finally  subdued  in  an  insurrection  incited  by  one 
Ami  Perrin.  From  that  time  forward  the  reformatory 
ideas  of  Calvin  were  carried  through  in  both  Church 
and  State  with  a  consistency  as  rigid  as  iron,  and 
Geneva  became  a  center  whence  reformatory  influences 
spread  to  the  remotest  parts  of  Europe.  By  an  exten- 
sive correspondence  and  numerous  theological  theses, 
he  exerted  a  powerful  personal  influence  upon  a  certain 
class  of  mind  far  beyond  the  boundaries  of  Switzerland. 
The  theological  academy  of  Geneva,  founded  in  1588, 
supplied  the  churches  of  many  foreign  countries,  espe- 
cially France,  with  preachers  trained  in  the  spirit  of 
Calvin.  When  Calvin  died,  in  1564,  the  continuation 
of  his  wTork  devolved  upon  the  learned  Theodore  Beza. 
Calvin  disagreed  in  many  points  with  Zwingle,  whose 
views  gradually  lost  ground  as  those  of  Calvin  ad- 
vanced. The  Second  Helvetic  Confession,  the  most  im- 
portant among  the  symbolical  books  of  the  Reformed 
Church,  which  was  compiled  by  Bullinger  in  Zurich, 
published  in  1566,  and  recognized  in  all  Reformed 
countries,  completed,  we  are  told,  the  superiority  of 
Calvin's  reformatory  notions  over  those  of  Zwingle. 

Calvin  was  only  eight  years  old  when  Luther  posted 
his  famous  theses  upon  the  door  of  the  Cathedral  in 
Wittenberg.  He  was  born  at  Noyon,  in  Picardy,  on 
the  10th  of  July,  1509.  He  was  well  provided  for  by 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  65 

families  of  nobility,  who  assisted  him  in  obtaining  a 
splendid  education  in  the  best  colleges  of  Paris.  His 
physical  constitution  was  not  strong,  but  early  in  life  he 
developed  extraordinary  intellectual  power.  He  was 
raised  in  affluence,  and  was  never  subjected  to  penury 
and  rough  discipline,  as  were  the  German  and  Swiss  re- 
formers. In  college  he  surpassed  his  companions  in 
severe  mental  application,  and  in  a  natural  aptitude  to 
learn.  He  spent  most  of  his  time  by  himself,  and  from 
his  serious  and  severe  turn  of  mind,  he  was  nicknamed 
by  his  companions,  "The  Accusative  Case."  At  the 
age  of  eighteen  he  received  the  tonsure,  and  preached 
occasionally,  but  had  not  taken  orders,  as  his  father, 
changing  his  plan,  concluded  to  qualify  "him  for  the 
profession  of  a  jurist.  He  studied  under  the  most  cele- 
brated teachers.  Before  long,  however,  his  attention 
was  directed  to  the  study  of  the  Scriptures  through  tho 
influence  of  Protestant  relatives.  Little  is  known  o!' 
his  public  career  until  about  1532,  soon  after  which  lie 
gives  an  account  of  his  "sudden  conversion."  "Calvin 
had  hesitated  about  becoming  a  Protestant,  out  of  rev- 
erence for  the  Church.  But  he  so  modified  his  concep- 
tion of  the  Church  as  to  perceive  that  the  change  did 
not  involve  a  renunciation  of  it.  Membership  in  the 
true  Church  was  consistent  with  renouncing  the  rule  of 
the  Roman  Catholic  prelacy;  for  the  Church,  in  its 
essence  invisible,  exists  in  a  true  form  wherever  the 
gospel  is  faithfully  preached  and  the  sacraments  admin- 
istered conformably  to  the  directions  of  Christ."  So 
says  George  P.  Fisher,  D.  D.,  in  his  History  of  the  Ref- 
ormation, p.  195-6. 

Calvin,  by  his  great  learning,  by  the  rare  acutencss 
of  his  intellect,  and  by  his  extensive  acquaintance  with 
the   contents   of  the  Bible,  became    an    acknowledged 
6 


66  JOHN  CALVIN  AND  CALVINISM. 

leader  of  the  Protestant  party  in  France.  Speaking  of 
Calvin's  characteristics  as  a  writer  and  a  man,  Prof. 
Fisher  says:  "His  direct  influence  was  predominantly 
and  almost  exclusively  upon  the  higher  classes  of  soci- 
ety. He  and  his  system  acted  powerfully  upon  the 
people,  but  indirectly  through  the  agency  of  others. 
He  was  a  patrician  in  his  temperament.  By  his  early 
associations,  and  as  an  eft'ect  of  his  culture,  he  acquired 
a  certain  refinement  and  decided  affinities  for  the  class 
elevated  by  birth  or  education.  This  wcs  one  of  his 
points  of  dissimilarity  to  Luther:  he  was  not  fitted, 
like  the  German  reformer,  to  come  home  to  the  'busi- 
ness and  bosoms'  of  common  men.  He  had  not  the 
popular  eloquence  of  Luther,  nor  had  he  the  genius 
that  left  its  impress  on  the  words  and  works  of  the 
Saxon  reformer;  but  he  was  a  more  exact  and  finished 
scholar  than  Luther."  Melancthon  greeted  Calvin  as 
"  the  theologian,"  and  by  the  enemies  of  Protestantism 
his  work  was  styled  "the  Koran  of  the  heretics."  A 
contemporary  writer  thus  spoke  of  him : 

"Some  think  on  Calvin-heaven's  own  mantle  fell, 
While  others  deemed  him  an  instrument  of  hell." 

Professedly  he  adopted  the  Bible  as  the  sole  standard 
of  doctrine,  while  at  the  same  time  he  made  his  peculiar 
speculation  of  Predestination  to  overshadow  the  whole 
Bible,  and  to  render  nugatory  the  revealed  plan  of  sal- 
vation. "While  his  "Institutes"  show  him  to  be  a  very 
acute  critic  and  a  profound  exegetical  writer,  yet  at  the 
same  time  it  is  apparent  that  by  his  theocratic  interpre- 
tations of  Scripture  he  renders  the  gospel  of  Christ  a 
myth.  "While  he  scouts  the  doctrine  that  the  truth  of 
the  Bible  rests  on  the  authority  of  the  Church,  and 
holds  that  the  divine  authority  of  the  Bible  can  be  es- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  67 

tablished  by  reason,  he  at  the  same  time  maintains  that 
n  spiritual  insight  of  gospel  truth  is  imparted  directly 
by  the  Holy  Spirit.  While  he  professes  little  esteem 
for  the  fathers  of  the  Church,  and  while  he  stigmatizes 
the  dogmas  and  rites  of  the  Papacy  as  the  "impious  in- 
ventions of  men,"  without  warrant  from  the  Word  of 
God,  yet  at  the  same  time,  unlike  the  other  reformers, 
he  frequently  pays  deference  to  the  Church.  Believing 
in  a  Church  Invisible,  composed  of  true  believers,  and 
also  believing  in  the  Church  Visible,  the  criteria  of  which 
are  the  proper  administration  of  the  Sacraments  and 
the  teaching  of  the  Word,  and  theoretically  demanding 
positive  submission  to  the  model  of  the  New  Testament, 
he  at  the  same  time  fails  to  identify  the  apostolic  Church 
in  its  complete  restoration  and  purity.  The  smell  of  the 
Papacy  tinges  much  of  his  writings.  Prof.  Fisher  thus 
summarizes  the  peculiar  theological  tenets  of  Calvin : 

Predestination  to  him  is  the  correlate  of  human 
dependence;  the  counterpart  of  the  doctrine  of  grace; 
the  antithesis  to  salvation  by  merit;  the  implied  con- 
sequences of  man's  complete  bondage  to  sin.  In  election, 
it  is  involved  that  man's  salvation  is  not  his  own  work, 
but,  wholly,  the  work  of  the  grace  of  God;  and  in 
election,  also,  there  is  laid  a  sure  foundation  for  the 
believer's  security  under  all  the  assaults  of  temptation. 
It  is  practical  interest  which  Calvin  is  sedulous  to  guard ; 
he  clings  to  the  doctrine  for  what  he  considers  its  relig- 
ious value;  and  it  is  no  more  than  justice  to  him  to 
remember  that  he  habitually  styles  the  tenet,  which 
proved  to  be  so  obnoxious,  an  unfathomable  mystery, 
an  abyss  into  which  no  mortal  mind  can  descend.  And, 
whether  consistently  or  not,  there  is  the  most  earnest 
assertion  of  the  moral  and  responsible  nature  of  man. 
Augustine  held  that  in  the  fall  of  Adam,  the  entire 
race  were  involved  in  a  common  act  and  a  common 
catastrophe.  The  will  is  not  destroyed ;  it  is  still  free 
to  sin,  but  is  utterly  disabled  as  regards  holiness.  Out 


68  JOHN  CALVIN  AND  CALVINISM. 

of  the  mass  of  mankind,  all  of  whom  are  alike  guilty, 
God  chooses  a  part  to  be  the  recipients  of  his  mercy, 
whom  he  purifies  by  an  irresistible  influence,  but  leaves 
the  rest  to  suffer  the  penalty  which  they  have  justly 
brought  upon  themselves.  In  the  "Institutes,"  Calvin 
does  what  Luther  had  done  in  his  book  against  Eras 
mus;  he  makes  the  Fall  itself,  the  primal  transgression, 
the  object  of  an  efficient  decree.  In  this  particular  he 
goes  beyond  Augustine,  and  apparently  affords  a  sanc- 
tion to  the  extreme,  or  supralapsarian  type  of  theology, 
which  afterwards  found  numerous  defenders — which 
traces  sin  to  the  direct  agency  of  God,  and  even  founds 
the  distinction  of  right  and  wrong  ultimately  on  liis 
omnipotent  will.  [Inst.  3,  xxiii.  6,  seq.]  But  when 
Calvin  was  called  upon  to  define  his  doctrine  more  care- 
fully, as  in  the  Consensus  Grenevensis,  he  confines  himself 
to  the  assertion  of  a  permissive  decree  —  a  volitivc 
permission  —  in  the  case  of  the  first  sin.  In  other 
words,  he  does  not  overstep  the  Augustinian  position. 
He  explicitly  avers  that  every  decree  of  the  Almighty 
springs  from  reasons  which,  though  hidden  from  us, 
are  good  and  suificient;  that  is  to  say,  he  founds  will 
upon  right,  and  not  right  upon  will.  lie  differs,  how- 
ever, both  from  Augustine  and  Luther,  in  affirming  that 
none  who  are  once  converted  fall  from  a  state  of  grace, 
the  number  of  believers  being  coextensive  with  the 
number  of  the  elect. 

Calvin  lives  in  history  as  a  scholar  and  a  theologian, 
but  not  as  a  reformer.  He  rendered  valuable  service  as 
an  interpreter  and  expounder  of  Scriptures,  but,  like 
Luther,  Zwingle  and  Ivnox,  he  failed  to  restore  the 
primitive  apostolic  order  of  things.  His  speculations, 
theologically  known  as  Predestination,  Total  Hereditary 
Depravity,  Particular  Election,  Reprobation,  Final  Per- 
severance and  the  Eternal  Decrees,  have  only  served  the 
purpose  of  dividing  the  people  of  God  instead  of  uniting 
them — have  only  perplexed  and  confused  the  human 
mind  instead  of  making  plain  the  simplicity  of  the 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS'.  69 

gospel.  It  is  said  of  Calvin  by  his  biographers,  that  at 
times  he  was  so  carried  away  by  gusts  of  passion,  that 
he  lost  all  self-control.  He  had  tried  in  vain,  he  says, 
to  "tame  the  wild  beast  of  his  anger;"  and  on  his 
death-bed  he  asked  pardon  of  the  Senate  of  Geneva  for 
outbursts  of  passion,  while  at  the  same  time  he  thanked 
them  for  their  forbearance. 

Calvin,  by  instinct  and  choice,  was  better  fitted  for 
the  rigid  Theocracy  of  Moses  than  for  the  liberty  of  the 
gospel.  He  had  a  stronger  inclination  toward  Mosaic 
legislation  than  toward  a  system  of  divine  truth  which 
makes  the  individual  free.  He  ruled  with  a  rod  of  iron 
in  the  city  of  Geneva,  where  he  directed  civil  as  well  as 
ecclesiastical  affairs.  "In  1568,  under  the  stern  code 
which  was  established  under  the  auspices  of  Calvin,  a 
child  was  beheaded  for  striking  its  father  and  mother. 
A  child  sixteen  years  old,  for  attempting  to  strike  its 
mother,  was  sentenced  to  death;  but,  on  account  of  its 
youth,  the  sentence  was  commuted,  and  having  been 
publicly  whipped,  with  a  cord  about  its  neck,  it  was 
banished  from  the  city.  In  1565  a  woman  was  chastised 
with  rods  for  singing  songs  to  the  melody  of  the  Psalms." 
And  other  inflictions  are  recorded  too  numerous  to 
mention.  The  expulsion  of  Castellio  from  Geneva,  a 
highly  cultivated  scholar  whom  Calvin  had  brought 
from  Strasburg,  to  take  charge  of  the  Geneva  school — 
an  expulsion  caused  by  the  influence  of  Calvin  himself 
— and  the  death  of  Servetus,  instigated  by  Calvin,  and 
executed  by  those  directly  under  his  influence,  because 
Servetus  wrote  a  book  entitled  "  Errors  of  the  Trinity," 
which  contradicted  the  opinions  of  Calvin, — these  heart- 
less acts  indicate  the  temper  of  Calvin's  spirit,  these 
show  the  character  of  his  cold  intellect,  these  demonstrate 
the  rigidity  and  inflexibility  of  his  will  power.  The 


70  JOHN  CALVIN  AND  CALVINISM. 

powerful  intellect  of  such  a  man  may  excite  the  admi- 
ration of  cold-hearted  theologians,  and  overawe  the 
ignorant  and  superstitious  with  amazement,  but  such  a 
disposition  can  never  command  the  love  and  affection 
of  the  "common  people."  In  our  opinion,  there  is 
nothing  in  Calvinism  but  the  defeat  of  Christianity — 
there  is  nothing  in  it  on  which  a  sinful  and  helpless 
world  can  lean  for  support.  There  is  not  a  gleam  of 
hope  iu  it.  It  is  a  death-dealing  system. 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND. 


WE  headed  this  series  of  articles  Reformatory  Move- 
ments. It  may  become  evident  before  we  conclude,  that 
this  series  should  have  been  designated  A  History  of  the 
Protestant  Denominations,  for  the  reason  that  many  of 
them  do  not  contain  the  elements  of  religious  reforma- 
tion at  all. 

The  principles  of  the  Lutheran  Reformation  swept 
across  the  English  Channel,  and  seized  the  people  of 
the  British  Empire.  But,  as  might  have  been  expected, 
the  heresies  of  Luther  and  of  Wycliffe  met  with  intense 
and  malicious  opposition  from  the  start.  King  Henry 
VIII.,  at  the  outbreak  of  the  politico-religious  revolu- 
tion, became  a  conspicuous  opponent  of  Luther,  as  well 
as  a  champion  of  the  Papal  cause.  For  writing  a 
polemical  book  against  Luther  upon  the  Seven  Sac- 
raments, Leo  X.  conferred  upon  the  King  the  title 
"Defender  of  the  Faith"  (Defensor  Fidei).  This  took 
place  in  1521.  Henry  also  addressed  a  letter  to  the 
emperor  of  Germany,  in  which  he  demanded  the  extir- 
pation of  the  heretics.  But  the  doctrines  of  Luther 
found  ardent  adherents  even  at  the  English  universities, 
and  an  English  translation  of  the  Bible,  by  Frith  and 
Tyndale,  members  of  the  University  of  Cambridge, 
produced  a  decisive  and  salutary  effect.  It  was  not 
long,  however,  until  King  Henry  had  a  quarrel  with 
the  Pope,  because  the  latter  refused  to  annul  Henrv's 

(71) 


72  ORIGIN  OF  THE  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND. 

marriage  with  Catharine,  of  Aragon,  the  niece  of  the 
Emperor  Charles  V.  Henry,  who  represented  that  his 
marriage  with  Catharine,  his  brother's  widow,  was 
open  to  objections,  laid  the  matter,  by  advice  of 
Thomas  Craumer,  before  the  universities  of  Europe, 
"not  abstaining,  however,  from  the  use  of  bribery 
abroad,  and  of  menaces  at  home;"  but  when  replies 
came  back  declaring  the  marriage  with  a  brother's  wife 
null  and  void,  the  King  separated  from  Catharine,  mar- 
ried Anne  Boleyu,  and,  as  a  consequence,  fell  under  the 
Papal  ban. 

Through  the  conniving  of  Henry,  the  English  Parlia- 
ment was  induced  to  sunder  the  connection  between 
England  and  Rome,  and  to  recognize  the  King  as  head 
of  the  new  Church.  It  became  the  fixed  purpose  of 
Henry  to  destroy,  if  possible,  the  influence  of  the  Pope 
over  the  Church  of  England,  with  a  desire  at  the  same 
time  to  preserve  its  Catholic  character.  As  a  revenge 
upon  the  Pope,  he  subjected  the  cloisters  to  a  searching 
investigation  in  1535,  and  in  the  following  year  he 
totally  abolished  them.  In  1538,  the  Bible  was  diffused 
in  the  mother  tongue  as  the  only  source  of  doctrine; 
"but  the  statute  of  1539  imposed  distinct  limits  upon 
the  Reformation,  and,  in  particular,  confirmed  transub- 
Rtantiation,  priestly  celibacy,  masses  for  the  dead,  and 
auricular  confession."  After  the  Pope's  authority  was 
abolished  in  England,  Parliament  passed  the  Act  of 
Supremacy,  "That  the  King,  our  sovereign  lord,  his 
heirs  and  successors,  Kings  of  this  realm,  shall  be 
taken,  accepted,  and  reputed  the  only  supreme  head  in 
earth  of  the  Church  of  Eno-land,  called  the  An^licana 

«-_>  *  O 

Ecclesia." 

And   this  was  the  origin  of  the  Episcopal  Church! 
Up  to  this  memorable  event,  the  Pope  of  Rome  was 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  73 

recognized  as  head  of  the  Church  of  England:  now 
Henry  VIII.  becomes  head  of  the  Church,  and  the 
ecclesiastical  are  brought  into  subjection  to  the  civil 
powers.  Many  of  those  who  refused  to  submit  to  the 
new  order  of  things  in  England,  were  executed,  and 
their  goods  confiscated  by  the  loyal  but  servile  minions 
of  the  English  King.  It  is  evident  that  while  Henry 
was  a  Protestant  in  form,  he  was  a  Romanist  in  heart. 
A  powerful  party,  headed  by  Thomas  Cranmcr,  after- 
wards Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and  Thomas  Cromwell, 
royal  vicar-general  in  ecclesiastical  affairs,  exerted  a 
silent  influence  towards  the  Reformed  churches  of  con- 
tinental Europe.  They  met  with  little  success  during 
the  reign  of  Henry,  but  gained  a  temporary  ascendency 
in  the  regency  which  ruled  England  during  the  minor- 
ity of  Edward  VI.  Certain  parties,  including  Peter 
Martyr,  Bucer  and  Fagius,  were  invited  to  England  to 
aid  Cranmer  in  establishing  the  Reformation.  The 
basis  was  laid  in  the  Book  of  Homilies  (1547),  the  new 
English  Liturgy  (the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  1548), 
and  the  Forty-two  Articles,  1552;  but  the  labors  of 
Cranmer  were  interrupted  by  the  death  of  Edward  VI. 
in  1553.  His  successor,  Queen  Mary,  the  daughter  of 
Henry  and  Catharine  of  Aragon,  was,  as  the  intelligent 
reader  knows,  a  devoted  partisan  of  the  Church  of 
Rome,  during  whose  bloody  reign  Cranmer  and  from  - 
three  hundred  to  four  hundred  other  persons  were  exe- 
cuted on  account  of  their  religious  views.  A  Papal 
nuncio  appeared  in  England,  and  an  obsequious  Parlia- 
ment sanctioned  the  reunion  with  Rome;  but  the 
affections  of  the  people  were  not  regained,  and  the 
early  death  of  Mary,  in  1558,  put  an  end  to  the  official 
restoration  of  the  Papal  Church.  Queen  Elizabeth,  the 
daughter  of  Henry  and  Anne  Boleyn,  whose  birth,  in 
7 


74  ORIGIN  OF  THE  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND. 

consequence  of  the  Papal  decision,  was  regarded  by  the 
Roman  Catholics  as  illegitimate,  resumed  the  work  of 
her  father,  and  completed  the  English  Reformation,  as 
a  work  distinct  both  from  the  Church  of  Rome  and  the 
Reformation  of  Germany  aud  Switzerland. 


THE  THIRTY-NIKE  ARTICLES. 


THE  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  which  had  been 
adopted  under  Edward  VI.,  was  so  changed  as  to  be 
less  offensive  to  the  Romish  party;  and  by  the  Act  of 
Uniformity,  June,  1559,  it  was  made  binding  on  all  the 
churches  of  the  kingdom.  Most  of  the  subjects  of  the 
Pope  conformed.  The  Confession  of  Faith,  which  had 
been  formulated  under  Edward,  in  forty-two  articles, 
was  reduced  to  Thirty-nine  Articles,  and  in  this  form  it 
was  adopted  by  a  convocation  of  the  clergy,  at  London, 
in  1562,  and  by  Parliament  made,  in  1571,  the  rule  of 
faith  for  all  the  clergy  of  the  realm.  According  to  the 
Thirty-nine  Articles,  the  Scriptures  contain,  so  they  tell 
us,  everything  necessary  to  salvation.  We  are  further 
informed  that  justification  is  through  faith  alone,  which 
Article,  we  presume,  was  intended  as  an  offset  to  the 
Romish  doctrine  of  justification  by  works  alone,  or  the 
doctrine  of  indulgences;  but  works  acceptable  to  God 
are  the  necessary  fruit  of  this  faith.  Of  course,  neither 
Christ  nor  his  apostles  were  consulted,  when  the  English 
Parliament  declared  that  supreme  power  over  the  Church 
is  vested  in  the  English  crown,  though  limited  by  the 

O  O  */ 

statutes.  Bishops  continued  to  be  the  highest  ecclesias- 
tical officers  and  the  first  barons  of  the  realm,  which,  it 
must  be  confessed,  does  not  resemble  the  simplicity  of 
the  primitive  order.  Subscription  to  the  Articles  was 
made  binding  on  the  clergy;  freedom  of  conscience  was 

(75) 


76  THE  THIRTY-NINE  ARTICLES. 

granted  to  the  laity.  The  adoption  of  the  Thirty-nine 
Articles  completed,  substantially,  the  constitution  of 
the  Episcopal  Church  of  England.  Some  parts  of  the 
Church  government  and  the  Liturg}r,  especially  the  re- 
taining of  sacerdotal  vestments,  gave  great  offense  to  a 
number  of  zealous  people,  of  a  radical  turn  of  mind, 
who  had  suffered  persecution  during  the  reign  of  Mary, 
and,  while  exiles,  had  become  strongly  attached  to  the 
extreme  dogmas  of  Calvinism.  They  demanded  a 
greater  purity  of  the  Church  (hence  the  origin  of  the 
term  "Puritans"),  a  simple,  spiritual  form  of  worship, 
a  strict  church  discipline,  and  a  Presbyterian  form  of 
government.  The  Act  of  Uniformity,  in  1559,  threat- 
ened all  Non-conformists  with  fines  and  imprisonment, 
and  their  ministers  with  deposition  and  banishment. 
When  the  provisions  of  the  Act  began  to  be  enforcedj 
a  number  of  the  Non-conformist  ministers  formed  sepa- 
rate congregations  in  connection  with  Presbyteries, 
subsequent  to  1572,  and  a  considerable  portion  of  the 
ministers  and  laity  of  the  Established  Church  sympa- 
thized with  them.  The  rupture  between  the  parties 
was  widened,  when,  in  1592,  by  an  act  of  Parliament  it 
was  decreed  that  all  who  obstinately  refused  to  attend 
public  worship,  or  induced  others  to  do  so,  should  be 
imprisoned  and  submit,  or  after  three  months  be  ban- 
ished; and  again,  in  1595,  when  the  Presbyterians 
applied  the  Mosaic  Sabbath  laws  to  the  Lord's  day,  and 
when  Calvin's  doctrines  respecting  Predestination  ex- 
cited bitter  and  lengthy  disputes. 

Thus  far,  by  the  aid  of  history,  we  have  learned  that 
Henry  VIII.,  a  very  dissolute  king,  was  constituted 
head  of  the  English  Church,  or  the  Episcopal  Church, 
called  so  by  the  fact  that  all  church  government  is 
lodged  in  a  bench  of  lordly  Bishops,  that  the* Book  of 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  77 

Prayer  was  adopted,  which  was  patterned  after  the 
Roman  Catholic  Missal,  and  that  the  Thirty-nine  Arti- 
cles, which  it  is  not  necessary  to  insert  here,  became 
the  Creed  of  the  English  Church.  On  the  general 
character  of  the  Anglican  or  English  Church,  George 
P.  Fisher,  Professor  of  Ecclesiastical  History  in  Yale 
College,  has  this  to  say : 

As  head  of  the  Church,  the  King  could  make  and 
deprive  hishops,  as  he  could  appoint  and  degrade  all 
other  officers  in  the  kingdom.  The  Episcopal  polity 
was  retained,  partly  because  the  bishops  generally  fell 
in  with  the  proceedings  of  Henry  VIII.  and  Edward 
for  the  reform  of  the  Church,  and  on  account  of  the 
compact  organization  of  the  Monarchy,  in  consequence 
of  which  the  nation  acted  as  one  body.  But  in  the 
first  age  of  the  Reformation,  and  until  the  rise  of  Puri- 
tanism as  a  distinct  party,  there  was  little  controversy 
among  Protestants  in  relation  to  Episcopacy.  ISTot  only 
was  Melancthon  willing  to  allow  bishops  with  a  jure 
humano  authority,  but  Luther  and  Calvin  were  also  of 
the  same  mind.  The  Episcopal  constitution  of  the 
English  Church  for  a  long  period  put  no  barrier  in  the 
way  of  the  most  free  and  fraternal  relations  between 
that  body  and  the  Protestant  Churches  on  the  conti- 
nent. As  we  have  seen,  Cranmer  placed  foreign 
divines  in  very  responsible  places  in  the  English 
Church.  Ministers  who  had  received  Presbyterian  or- 
dination were  admitted  to  take  charge  of  English 
parishes  without  a  question  as  to  the  validity  of  their 
orders.  (History  of  the  Reformation,  p.  332-33.) 

"The  feature,"  says  Prof.  Fisher,  "that  distinguished 
the  English  Church  from  the  Reformed  Churches  on 
the  continent,  was  the  retention  in  its  polity  and  wor- 
ship of  so  much  that  had  belonged  to  the  Catholic 
system."  And  the  Episcopal  Church  is  to  this  clay 
essentially  Catholic.  The  English  Church  owes  its  ex- 
istence mQre  to  a  stroke  of  political  policy  (coup  d'etat] 


78  THE  THIRTY-NINE  ARTICLES. 

than  to  a  deep  conviction  of  the  supremacy  of  truth. 
The  supremacy  of  the  King  himself  was  deemed  of 
vastly  more  importance  than  the  supremacy  of  apostolic 
truth.  In  all  these  controversies  the  Church  of  Christ, 
as  founded  by  the  apostles,  was  not  once  thoroughly  and 
distinctively  identified.  No  plan  of  salvation  is  defined. 
The  Bible  is  translated,  which,  for  the  times,  was  a 
memorable  event,  and  one  fraught  with  far-reaching 
consequences.  The  translation  of  the  Bible  into  the 
vernacular  of  the  people  was  the  harbinger  of  both  the 
civil  and  religious  liberty  of  modern  times.  Great  rev- 
olutionary principles  were  abstracted  from  the  Bible, 
and  many  proof-texts  from  the  Bible  furnished  matter 
for  divisive  and  contradictory  creeds,  but  the  Bible 
itself  as  an  infallible  guide,  and  as  containing  the  divine 
system  of  salvation,  was  laid  upon  the  shelf  as  a  useless 
piece  of  lumber.  The  controversialists  of  that  period 
scarcely  ever  make  an  appeal  to  the  "Word  of  God  in 
their  efforts  to  sustain  their  respective  dogmas  and  the- 
ories. While  they  all  acknowledged  the  supremacy  of 
the  Scriptures,  and  in  a  general  way  deferred  to  them, 
yet  the  facts  go  to  show  that  the  truth  of  the  Bible  was 
nullified  and  the  power  of  the  gospel  paralyzed  by 
savage  and  ceaseless  controversies — by  controversies 
between  the  defenders  of  the  Augsburg  Confession  and 
the  advocates  of  the  Heidelberg  Catechism — by  polem- 
ical struggles  between  Luther  and  Zwingle — by  angry 
disputes  between  the  King  of  England  and  the  Pope  of 
Rome,  and  by  repeated  wrangles  of  opposing  Councils. 
Dogmas  were  popularized,  creeds  were  stereotyped, 
human  opinions  were  consecrated,  metaphj-sical  specu- 
lations furnished  food  for  the  common  mind,  and 
doctrinal  statements,  essentially  dead,  and  wholly  inop- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  79 

erative,   were   made   to   occupy  the   place   of  a  living 
Bible. 

"Why  did  not  the  "Reformers"  of  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury continue  as  they  had  begun?  Who  authorized 
them  to  make  creeds  and  catechisms,  and  to  formulate 
Church  standards?  Why  did  they  occupy  more  time  in 
discussing  Transubstantiation  and  Predestination — both 
metaphysical  and  untaught  questions,  and  not  compre- 
hensible by  the  common  people — and  on  which  no 
man's  salvation  depends — than  they  spent  in  preaching 
and  teaching  just  what  the  apostles  preached  and 
taught?  The  followers  of  the  Reformers  of  the  six- 
teenth century  have  had  350  years  in  which  to  follow 
up  the  apostles,  but  up  to  this  time  they  have  not  found 
them. 


THE  BOOK  OF  COMMON  PRAYER. 


A  HISTORY  of  the  origin  and  development  of  Church 
Creeds  is  indeed  a  curious  and  entertaining,  if  not  a 
profitable,  study.  The  history  of  Creeds  is  not  a 
history  of  genuine  reformation,  but  in  the  manufacture 
of  those  tests  of  church  fellowship  we  discover  the 
mental  and  spiritual  portraits  of  uninspired  men.  God 
"breathed  into  man  the  breath  of  lives,"  but  creed- 
mongers  have  breathed  into  creeds  the  putrid  breath  of 
sectaries,  dogmatists,  humanists,  traditionists,  sciolists, 
scholastics,  opinionists,  purists,  transccndentalists,  met- 
aphysicians, and  so  forth.  God  made  the  Bible,  but 
men  made  creeds.  The  trail  of  the  serpent  is  found  in 
every  human  creed.  The  hope  of  the  world  is  to  be 
found  in  the  Bible;  the  hope  of  prelates  and  of  priests 
— the  glowing  hope  of  all  sectarian  leaders — can  be 
found  in  diverse  Symbols  of  Faith,  in  the  figments  and 
fancies  of  creed  architects,  in  Church  Standards  which 
divide  the  people  of  one  common  Lord,  and  in  every 
form  of  "Systematic  Theology,"  which  furnishes  em- 
ployment to  as  many  theologians,  and  to  as  many 
distinct  parties,  as  are  represented  by  these  varying  sys- 
tems. In  short,  the  history  of  creed-making  is  the 
history  of  human  passion,  human  prejudice,  human 
bigotr}',  superstition,  ignorance  of  God's  Word,  human 
ambition,  of  plots  and  counterplots,  of  partisans,  of 
strife,  of  theological  tournaments,  and  of  cunning 

(80) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  81 

craftiness.  They  are  the  product  of  ingenious  men,  in- 
tellectually acute,  skilled  in  the  art  of  dialectics,  and 
powerful  as  polemics. 

The  history  of  the  incubation  and  birth  of  the  English 
Prayer  Book,  or  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  is  a  study 
that  will  tire  any  mind,  and  discourage  any  heart,  if 
one  had  no  other  object  in  view  except  the  mere  read- 
ing of  its  history.  It  is  but  just  to  say  that  the  men, 
as  a  class,  who  inflicted  creeds  upon  the  world,  were 
better  in  spirit  and  character  than  the  creeds  they 
made;  and  that  whatever  of  goodness  and  greatness 
they  possessed,  and  that  whatever  of  purity  and  nobil- 
ity of  life  they  manifested,  they  derived  directly  from 
the  Word  of  God  and  from  the  Fountain  of  Life: 
which  fact,  by  itself  alone,  is  a  crushing  argument 
against  all  creeds — even  against  "Revised  Creeds,"  as 
at  present  proposed  by  the  orthodox  world. 

Before  the  Reformation  of  Luther,  the  Missals,  Bre- 
viaries, etc.,  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  were  in  use  in 
England.  In  1537,  the  Convocation  put  forth  in  En- 
glish, "  The  godly  and  pious  Institution  of  a  Christian 
Man"  containing  the  Lord's  Prayer,  the  Creed,  the 
Commandments,  and  the  Ave  Maria.  In  1547,  in  the 
reign  of  Edward  VI.,  a  committee  was  appointed  to 
draw  up  a  Liturgy  in  English,  free  from  Popish  errors. 
Cranmer,  Ridley,  and  other  eminent  reformers,  com- 
posed this  committee,  and  their  book  was  confirmed  by 
Parliament  in  1548.  This  is  known  as  the  first  Prayer- 
book  of  Edward  VI.  A  large  portion  of  it  was  taken 
from  the  old  services  used  in  England  before  the  Refor- 
mation; but  the  labors  of  Melancthon  and  Bucer  helped 
to  give  the  book  its  Protestant  form.  "About  the  end 
of  the  year  1550  exceptions  were  taken  against  some 
parts  of  this  book,  and  Archbishop  Cranmer  proposed 


82  THE  BOOK  OF  COMMON  PRAYER. 

a  new  review.  The  principal  alterations  occasioned  by 
this  second  review  were  the  addition  of  the  Sentences^ 
Exhortations,  Confession  and  Absolution,  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  morning  and  evening  services,  which  in  the 
first  Common  Prayer-book  began  with  the  Lord's 
Prayer;  the  addition  of  the  Commandments  at  the  be- 
ginning of  the  communion  office;  the  removing  of 
some  rights  and  ceremonies  retained  in  the  former 
book,  such  as  the  use  of  oil  in  confirmation,  the  unction 
of  the  sick,  prayers  for  the  departed  souls,  the  invoca- 
tion of  the  Holy  Ghost  at  the  consecration  of  the 
Eucharist,  and  the  prayer  ot  oblation  that  used  to  fol- 
low it;  the  omitting  the  rubric  that  ordered  water  to  be 
mixed  with  the  wine,  with  several  other  less  material 
variations.  The  habits,  likewise,  which  were  prescribed 
in  the  former  book  were  in  this  laid  aside;  and,  lastly, 
a  rubric  was  added  at  the  end  of  the  communion  office 
to  explain  the  reason  of  kneeling  at  the  Sacrament." 
(Hook.)  The  Liturgy,  thus  revised  and  altered,  was 
again  confirmed  by  Parliament  in  1551,  and  is  cited  as 
the  second  Prayer-book  of  Edward  VI.  Queen  Mary, 
on  her  accession,  repealed  the  acts  of  Edward,  and  re- 
stored, through  the  influence  of  her  Papal  advisers,  the 
Romanist  prayer-book.  "  On  the  accession  of  Elizabeth 
to  the  English  throne,  this  repeal,  however,  was  re- 
versed, and  the  second  book  of  Edward  VI.  with 
several  alterations  and  emendations,  was  re-established. 
This  Liturgy  continued  in  use  during  the  long  reign  of 
Elizabeth,  and  received  further  additions  and  improve- 
ments." (Eadie  Eccles.  Enc.} 

Early  in  the  reign  of  James  I.  the  Prayer  Book  was 
again  revised,  but  the  "improvements"  suggested  by 
James  were  not  ratified  by  Parliament.  In  1661,  the 
year  after  the  restoration  of  Charles  II.,  the  commis- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  83 

sioners,  both  Episcopal  and  Presbyterian,  who  had 
assembled  at  the  Savoy  to  revise  the  Liturgy,  having 
come  to  no  agreement,  the  Convocation  agreed  to  cer- 
tain "alterations  and  additions."  The  whole  book, 
being  finished,  passed  both  houses  of  Convocation;  it 
was  subscribed  to  by  bishops  and  clergy,  and  was  rati- 
fied by  act  of  Parliament,  and  received  the  royal  assent 
May  19,  1662.  This  was  the  last  revisal  of  the  Book 
of  Common  Prayer  in  which  any  alteration  was  made 
by  public  authority.  Several  attempts  have  been  made 
to  revise  the  book  since  1665,  but  without  success.  The 
first  attempt  was  made  in  the  reign  of  William  III.  en- 
couraged by  Tillotson  and  Stillingfleet,  who  in  1668 
had  united  with  Bates,  Manton  and  Baxter,  in  prepar- 
ing a  bill  for  the  "comprehension  of  Dissenters." 
Failing  then,  as  well  as  in  1681,  the  scheme  was 
resumed  after  the  Revolution,  and  in  1689  a  commis- 
sion was  formed  to  revise  the  Prayer-book.  A  number 
of  alterations  were  suggested,  in  order,  if  possible,  to 
gratify  the  Dissenters,  but  the  attempt  proved  abortive. 
There  is  at  the  present  time  a  Liturgical  Revision  Society 
in  England,  which,  in  its  Declaration  of  Principles  and 
Objects,  proposes  to  bring  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer 
"into  closer  conformity  with  the  written  word  of  God 
and  the  principles  of  the  Reformation,  by  excluding  all 
those  expressions  which  have  been  assumed  to  counte- 
nance Romanizing  doctrine  or  practice." 

After  the  American  Revolution,  the  "Protestant 
Episcopal  Church"  was  established  as  an  organization 
separate  from  the  Church  of  England,  in  1784.  In 
1786,  a  committee  was  appointed  to  adapt  the  English 
Liturgy  to  use  in  America,  and  they  prepared  a  book, 
which,  however,  never  came  into  general  use. 

At  the    General   Convention   in    October,   1789,   the 


84  THE  B30K  OF  COMMON  PRAYER. 

whole  subject  of  the  Liturgy  was  thrown  open  by  ap- 
pointing committees  on  the  different  portions  of  the 
Prayer-book,  whose  several  reports,  with  the  action  of 
the  two  houses  thereupon,  were  consolidated  in  the  Book 
of  Common  Prayer,  etc.,  as  it  is  now  in  use,  the  whole 
book  being  ratified  and  set  forth  by  a  vote  of  the  Con- 
vention on  the  sixteenth  of  October,  1789,  its  use  being 
prescribed  from  and  after  the  first  day  of  October,  1790. 
The  American  Liturgy  retai.is  all  that  is  excellent  in 
the  English  service,  omits  several  of  its  really  objection- 
able features,  brings  some  of  the  offices  (the  communion, 
for  example)  nearer  to  the  primitive  pattern,  modifies 
others  to  suit  our  peculiar  institutions,  and,  on  the 
whole,  is  a  noble  monument  to  the  wisdom,  prudence, 
piety  and  churchmanship  of  the  fathers  of  the  Ameri- 
can Church.  By  the  forty-fifth  canon  of  1832,  it  is 
required  that  every  minister  shall,  before  all  sermons 
and  lectures,  and  all  other  occasions  of  public  worship, 
use  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  as  the  same  is  or  may 
be  established  by  the  authority  of  the  General  Conven- 
tion of  this  Church.  And  in  performing  said  service, 
no  other  prayers  shall  be  used  than  those  prescribed  by 
the  said  book.  (Hook,  Church  Dictionary,  Am.  Ed.) 

"We  ask,  where  is  the  scriptural  authority  for  all  this 
priestly  jugglery  and  ecclesiastical  legislation?  There 
is  no  scriptural  authority,  and  the  creed-mongers  do  not 
pretend  to  give  any.  The  whole  question  rests  upon 
assumptions.  Why,  instead  of  working  over  three 
hundred  years  to  bring  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer 
"into  conformity  with  the  written  word  of  God,"  did  they 
not  take  the  "written  word  of  God,"  and  stand  upon  it 
and  stay  there?  Why  have  they  been  shuffling  around 
these  many  years?  If  it  is  reform  they  are  after,  and 
they  are  truly  seeking  the  unity  of  God's  people,  and  if 
they  are  really  desirous  of  discovering  and  identifying 
the  Apostolic  Church,  why  not  accept  the  teaching  of 
inspired  apostles,  and  follow  the  teaching  of  the  apos- 
tles, and  pattern  after  the  model  Church  as  established 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  85 

by  those  holy  men  of  God?  We  answer,  because  if 
they  were  to  do  so,  they  would  be  shorn  of  ecclesiasti- 
cal power;  bishops  could  no  longer  legislate  for  the 
"laity;"  distinctive  titles  of  honor  would  have  to  be 
given  up;  bishops  could  not  live  sumptuously  every 
day,  and  there  would  be  a  heavy  decrease  in  their  stip- 
ends; they  could  no  longer  lord  it  over  God's  heritage, 
and  all  chances  for  clerical  and  prelatical  promotion 
would  be  cut  off.  Liturgies,  and  "  Church  standards," 
and  Confessions  of  Faith,  are  changed  from  time  to 
time,  so  as  to  be  adapted  to  the  people  and  to  the 
times.  This  is  worldly  wisdom,  but  not  the  wisdom 
that'  comes  from  above.  These  ecclesiastical  vandals 
dare  not  change  the  Bible  to  suit  times  and  places,  and 
the  people;  but  they  will  assume  to  create  a  creed,  and 
then  assume  to  change  it  with  the  changing  times. 
Did  Christ  and  his  apostles  leave  instructions  to  the 
effect  that  the  gospel  and  the  plan  of  salvation  should, 
in  successive  ages,  be  so  changed  as  to  harmonize  with 
every  form  of  society,  and  with  the  varying  forms  of 
civil  goverment?  God  intended  that  the  truths  of  the 
Bible  and  the  doctrine  of  the  gospel  should  educate  and 
mold  society  and  civil  governments,  and  not  that  eccle- 
siastics and  civil  governments  should  transform  the 
word  of  God  into  Creeds  and  Symbols  of  Faith.  Why 
not  as  well  undertake  to  change  the  immutable  laws  of 
nature  as  to  presume  to  alter  or  modify  the  constitu- 
tional laws  of  the  kingdom  of  God? 

What  kind  of  an  infallible  guide  is  that  to  the  human 
soul,  that  "omits  objectionable  features,"  and  modifies 
others  to  suit  our  "peculiar  institutions,"  in  order  to 
bring  the  people  "  nearer  to  the  primitive  pattern  ?"  Why 
not  take  the  "primitive  pattern"  itself,  and  lay  aside 
all  makeshifts  and  counterfeits?  Can  we  not  under- 


86  THE  BOOK  OF  COMMON  PRAYER. 

stand  the  "primitive  pattern" — God's  own  workmanship 
— far  easier  than  all  human  imitations?  Creeds  do 
not  contain  the  principles  of  reform,  much  less  the  light 
and  the  knowledge  that  lead  to  a  complete  restoration 
of  apostolic  Christianity.  If  men  are  wiser  and  better, 
it  is  because  their  love  of  God  and  their  love  of  Bible 
truths  has  made  them  so.  They  are  good  in  spite  of 
their  lifeless  creeds.  Creeds  have  not  revolutionized 
the  world,  and  set  up  the  right  and  torn  down  the 
wrong,  but  the  spirit  of  Christ  and  the  power  of  the 
gospel  have  done  it. 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  WESTMINSTER  CONFESSION 
OF  FAITH. 


WE  now  come  to  speak  of  the  origin  of  the  Presby- 
terian Church  and  of  the  formation  of  the  Westminster 
Confession  of  Faith.  A  joint  resolution  of  the  houses 
of  the  English  Parliament,  without  the  sanction  of 
King  Charles  I.,  was  passed  June  12,  1643,  which  con- 
voked a  Synod  "for  settling  the  government  and  liturgy 
of  the  Church  of  England,  and  for  vindicating  and 
clearing  of  the  doctrine  of  said  Church  from  false 
aspersions  and  interpretations,"  and,  furthermore,  for 
bringing  about  a  more  perfect  reformation  of  the 
Church  than  was  obtained  under  Edward  VI.  and 
Elizabeth,  by  which  a  closer  union  of  sentiment  with 
the  Church  of  Scotland  and  the  Reformed  churches  of 
the  continent  might  be  secured.  Parliament  appointed 
to  membership  in  this  Synod  121  clergymen,  taken  from 
the  various  shires  of  England,  ten  members  of  the 
House  of  Lords,  and  twenty  members  from  the  House 
of  Commons.  The  General  Synod  of  Scotland,  August 
19,  1643,  elected  five  clergymen  and  three  lay  elders  as 
commissioners  to  the  Westminster  Synod.  About 
twenty  of  the  members  originally  summoned  were  cler- 
gymen of  the  Church  of  England,  and  several  of  them 
afterwards  bishops;  but  few  of  the  Episcopal  members 
took  their  seats.  The  bishops  of  the  English  Church 
never  acknowledged  its  claims,  and  the  King  con- 

(87) 


88        ORIGIN  OF  THE  WESTMINSTER  CONFESSION  OF  FAITH. 

demned  its  sessions  under  extreme  penalties,  June  22, 
1643.  The  Synod,  however,  contrary  to  the  will  of  the 
King,  convened  July  1,  1643,  in  Westminster  Abbey 
(hence  the  name,  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith),  in 
the  presence  of  both  houses  of  Parliament.  The  aver- 
age attendance  of  clerical  members  during  the  sessions 
was  between  sixty  and  eighty.  The  great  body  of  the 
members,  both  clerical  and  lay,  were  Presbyterians;  ten 
or  twelve  were  Independents,  or,  as  now  styled,  Con- 
gregationalists;  and  five  or  six  called  themselves  Eras- 
tians.  The  great  majority  were  Calvinistic  in  faith. 

The  purposes  for  which  this  august  Assembly  of 
divines  was  convoked,  as  already  intimated,  were  to 
vindicate  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England,  and 
to  recommend  such  further  reformation  of  her  disci, 
pline,  liturgy  and  government  as  might  "be  agreeable 
to  God's  holy  word,  and  most  apt  to  procure  and 
preserve  the  peace  of  the  Church  at  home,  and  nearer 
agreement  with  the  Church  of  Scotland  and  other  Re- 
formed churches  abroad."  But  the  Parliament,  feeling 
their  need  of  Scottish  aid,  acceded  to  the  Solemn  League 
and  Covenant,  and  urged  the  Scotch  to  send  their  depu- 
ties to  the  Assembly.  Its  objects  were  extended;  and, 
in  order  to  carry  out  the  covenanted  uniformity,  it  was 
empowered  to  prepare  a  new  Confession  of  Faith  and 
Catechism,  as  well  as  directories  for  public  worship  and 
church  government,  which  might  be  adopted  by  all  the 
Churches  represented.  The  Church  of  Scotland  threw 
all  its  influence  in  favor  of  strict  Calvinism  and  Presby- 
terianism.  Before  electing  delegates  to  the  Westminster 
Assembly,  in  compliance  with  the  request  of  Parliament, 
it  adopted,  August  17,  1643,  the  so-called  "Solemn 
League  and  Covenant,"  which  bound  the  Scottish 
nation  to  the  defense  of  the  Reformed  religion  in  Scot- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  89 

land,  the  furtherance  of  the  Reformation  in  England 
aud  Ireland  in  doctrine,  worship,  church  organization 
and  discipline;  the  establishing  of  ecclesiastical  and 
religious  uniformity  in  the  three  realms;  the  extirpa- 
tion of  papacy  and  prelacy,  of  heresy  and  all  ungodli- 
ness; and  the  support  of  all  the  rights  of  Parliament 
and  of  the  rightful  authority  of  the  King.  This 
document  was  immediately  transmitted  to  Parliament, 
and  thence  to  the  Westminster  Assembly,  and  was 
formally  endorsed  by  each  of  these  bodies,  but  was 
condemned  by  the  King.  The  Assembly  sought  to 
gain  the  fraternal  sympathies  of  the  Reformed  churches 
on  the  continent  also,  and  to  that  end  addressed  to 
them  circular  letters  which  elicited  more  or  less  favora- 
ble responses,  and  which  the  King  endeavored  to 
neutralize  by  issuing  a  manifesto  in  Latin  and  English, 
in  which  he  denied  the  intention  charged  upon  him  of 
re-establishing  the  Papal  power  in  his  realm.  The  Sol- 
emn League  and  Covenant,  binding  the  ecclesiastical 
bodies  of  the  two  nations  into  a  union,  had  been  passed 
in  Scotland,  August  17,  was  subsequently  accepted  by 
the  Westminster  Assembly,  and  ordered  by  the  English 
Parliament  to  be  printed,  September  21,  and  subscribed 
September  25,  when  the  House  of  Commons,  with  the 
Scottish  .Commissioners  and  the  Westminster  Assembly, 
met  in  the  Church  of  St.  Margaret,  Westminster.  The 
House  of  Lords  took  the  "Covenant,"  October  15. 

"The  question  of  church  government  occasioned  the 
most  difficulty,  and  seemed  for  a  time  impossible  to  be 
settled.  Many  of  the  most  learned  divines  who  were 
entirely  on  the  side  of  the  Parliament  were  yet  in  favor 
of  what  they  termed  primitive  episcopacy,  or  the 
system  in  which  the  presbyters  and  their  president 
governed  the  churches  in  common.  Then  there  were 
8 


90        ORIGIN  OF  THE  WESTMINSTER  CONFESSION  OF  FAITII. 

the  Scottish  commissioners  and  the  more  radical  Puritans, 
who  were  at  the  opposite  extreme;  and,  in  order  to 
reach  a  conclusion,  these  differences  must  be  reconciled. 
It  was  accomplished  after  much  discussion  and  long 
delay  by  the  adoption  of  the  Presbyterian  form  of  gov- 
ernment." 

A  committee,  consisting  of  about  twenty -five  members, 
was  appointed  by  the  Assembly  "to  prepare  matter  for  a 
joint  Confession  of  Faith,"  about  August  20, 1644.  The 
matter  was  prepared,  in  part,  at  least,  by  this  committee, 
and  the  digesting  of  it  into  a  formal  draught  was  in- 
trusted to  a  smaller  committee  on  May  12,  1645.  The 
debating  of  the  separate  articles  began  July  7,  1645,  and 
the  following  day  a  committee  of  three  (afterwards 
increased  to  five)  was  appointed  to  "take  care  of  the 
wording  of  the  Confession,"  as  the  article  should  be 
adopted  in  the  Assembly.  On  July  16,  the  committee 
reported  the  heads  of  the  Confession,  and  these  were 
distributed  to  the  three  large  committees  to  be  elabo- 
rated and  prepared  for  discussion.  Air  were  repeatedly 
read  and  debated  in  the  most  thorough  manner  possible 
in  the  Assembly.  On  September  25,  1646,  a  part  of  the 
Confession  was  finally  passed,  and  on  December  4,  the 
remainder  received  the  sanction  of  the  Assembly,  when 
the  entire  document  was  presented  to  the  Parliament. 
That  body  ordered  the  printing  of  600  copies  for  the  use 
of  members  of  Parliament  and  of  the  Assembly,  and 
that  Scripture  proofs  should  be  added  to  the  Confession, 
which  was  accordingly  done.  In  1647,  the  Confession 
was  approved  by  the  Church  of  Scotland  in  the  form 
in  which  it  passed  the  Assembly,  and  it  was  afterwards 
ratified  by  the  Scotch  Parliament.  It  was  passed  by 
the  English  Parliament  in  1648,  under  the  title  of 
Articles  of  Christian  Religion,  but  with  certain  changes. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  91 

The  basis  of  the  Confession,  says  the  historian,  is  doubt- 
less those  Calvinistic  articles  which  are  supposed  to 
have  been  prepared  by  Usher,  and  in  1615,  were  adopted 
by  the  Convocation  of  the  Irish  Church.  In  the  forma- 
tion of  this  Presbyterian  "Symbol"  the  Assembly  at 
first  undertook  to  revise  the  Thirty-nine  Articles  of  the 
Anglican  Church,  and  proceeded  with  that  work  until 
fifteen  articles  had  been  revamped  with  elements  of  a 
more  pronounced  Calvinistic  character  and  provided 
with  Scripture  proofs.  The  only  important  change 
made  in  this  process  was  the  omission  of  Article  VIII., 
concerning  the  authority  of  the  three  oecumenical 
symbols.  The  intention  of  the  Synod  was  to  ground 
every  statement  directly  on  Scripture  as  the  only  rule 
of  faith,  while  the  Church  of  England,  under  Edward 
VI.  and  Elizabeth,  conceded  to  Catholic  tradition,  "if 
not  in  conflict  with  Scripture,  a  regulative  authority." 
The  Scottish  delegates,  however,  induced  the  Assembly 
to  undertake  the  formation  of  an  entirely  "  new  Symbol." 
The  Confession,  under  the  title  of  "  The  Humble  Ad- 
vice of  the  Assembly  of  Divines,  now  by  Authority  of 
Parliament  sitting  at  Westminster,  concerning  a  Confession 
of  Faith,'1  etc.,  was  printed  in  London  in  December, 
1646,  without  proofs,  and  in  May,  1647,  with  proofs,  for 
the  use  of  the  houses  of  Parliament  and  the  Assembly. 
A  copy  of  this  last  edition  was  taken  to  Scotland  by 
the  com-nissioners,  and  from  it  300  copies  were  printed 
for  the  use  of  the  General  Assembly  there.  After  being 
approved  by  that  body,  it  was  published  in  Scotland 
with  the  title  of  "  The  Confession  of  Faith  Agreed  upon 
by  the  Assembly  of  Divines,"  etc.,  and  while  the  House 
of  Commons  were  still  considering  it,  a  London  book- 
seller brought  it  out  under  the  same  title  in  1648.  In 
the  same  year  it  was,  with  the  omission  of  parts  of 


92        ORIGIN  OF  THE  WESTMINSTER  CONFESSION  OF  FAITH. 

certain  chapters,  and  with  some  minute  verbal  altera- 
tions, approved  by  the  two  houses,  and  published  under 
the  title,  "Articles  of  Christian  Religion,  Approved  and 
Passed  by  both  Houses  of  Parliament  after  Advice  had 
with  the  Assembly  of  Divines."1  But  the  latter  form  is 
not  common,  and  the  Confession  continues  to  he  printed 
in  the  form  in  which  it  was  drawn  by  the  Assembly  and 
approved  by  the  Church  of  Scotland.  The  last  of  the 
Scotch  commissioners  left  the  Assembly  November  9, 
1647.  On  February  22,  1649,  after  the  Assembly  had 
held  1163  sittings,  lasting  each  from  nine  o'clock  A.  M. 
to  2  P.  M.,  the  Parliament,  by  an  ordinance,  changed 
what  remained  of  the  Assembly  into  a  committee  for 
trying  and  examining  ministers,  and  in  this  form  it 
continued  to  hold  weekly  sittings  until  the  dissolution  of 
the  "Long  Parliament,"  April  20,  1653.  The  Larger 
Catechism  was  sent  to  the  House  of  Commons  October 
22, 1647;  the  Shorter  Catechism,  November  25,  the  same 
year.  In  the  autumn  of  1648  both  houses  of  Parlia- 
ment ordered  the  printing  and  publishing  of  the  Shorter 
Catechism,  but  the  House  of  the  Lords  was  discontinued 
before  it  had  acted  on  the  Larger  Catechism. 

And  thus,  in  the  midst  of  such  politico  ecclesiastical 
throes  as  we  have  described,  the  Westminster  Confession 
of  Faith  was  born  into  the  world.  We  have  seen  that 
the  civil  powers  had  as  much  to  do  in  the  manufacture 
of  this  abstruse,  recondite,  metaphysical  document  as  the 
Church  "Divines."  It  is  the  creation  of  State  craft  nnd 
priest  craft.  It  is  a  compromise  between  Romanism 
and  Episcopacy — a  sort  of  hybrid,  begotten  of  the 
Papacy  and  born  of  Protestantism.  Facts  go  to  show 
that  Episcopacy  and  Presbyterianism,  as  well  as  Roman- 
ism, would  now,  as  then,  make  civil  government  sub- 
servient to  the  ecclesiastical  authorities.  It  is  but  just 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  93 

to  say  that  through  the  instrumentality  of  the  Reformers 
of  the  sixteenth  century  the  Papacy  received  a  fatal 
blow.  But  let  it  be  understood  that  it  was  not  the 
formulation  and  publication  of  Confessions  of  Faith, 
nor  the  influence  of  the  abstract  propositions  they 
contained,  that  paralyzed  the  arm  of  the  Pope,  and  that 
gave  impulse  to  the  Reformatory  movements  of  that 
eventful  age.  On  the  contrary,  it  was  the  translation 
of  the  Scriptures  into  the  language  of  the  common 
people,  and  the  faithful  proclamation  of  God's  word, 
that  effectually  and  fatally  weakened  the  despotism  of 
Rome.  It  was  Luther  and  Zwingle,  exposing  the  rot- 
tenness of  the  priesthood  of  Rome,  and  Calvin,  by  the 
word  of  God,  striking  at  the  false  theology  of  Romish 
prelates,  and  Knox,  by  the  same  word  of  God,  before 
creeds  took  on  form,  demolishing  the  governmental 
usurpations  of  the  Papal  See,  that,  combined  and  co- 
operating, wrought  the  mighty  work,  the  impulse  of 
which  revolution  still  moves  among  modern  reformers. 
As  a  Bible  people,  we  accept  the  Bible  principles  of 
reform,  as  advocated  and  applied  by  the  reformers  of 
the  sixteenth  century,  but  we  reject  their  Creeds  in  toto, 
as  being  the  product  of  fallible  and  uninspired  men,  and 
as  being  the  prolific  and  chief  source  of  sectarianism 
and  a  divided  Church,  with  all  their  concomitants  of 
sectarian  rivalry,  sectarian  bigotry  and  sectarian  pride. 
We  have  our  mission,  and  we  know  our  mission,  which 
is  the  repudiation  of  all  Symbols  of  Faith,  all  Church 
Standards,  and  all  bodies  that  presume  to  legislate  for 
the  Church  in  the  stead  of  Christ,  while  at  the  same 
time  we  shall  elevate  the  Bible  above  all  the  works  of 
men,  and  persistently  plead  for  complete  restoration  of 
apostolic  teaching  and  practice. 


ORIGIN  OF  CONGREGATIONALISM. 


now  come  to  the  origin  and  development  of  Con- 
gregationalism, which  forms  an  integral  and  interesting 
chapter  in  reformatory  movements.  As  contrasted  with 
Romanism  and  Episcopacy,  and  as  contrasted  also  with 
Presbyterianism,  we  shall  find  Congregationalism,  as  a 
system  of  "Church  polity,"  far  in  advance  of  those 
ecclesiastical  systems,  but,  in  some  features,  as  falling 
short  of  the  apostolic  order  of  things.  We  are  free  to 
admit  that  Congregationalism  makes  a  nearer  approach 
to  the  primitive  order  than  any  of  the  "  Orthodox 
Churches."  They  claim  that  their  system  is  only  a 
substantial  return  to  the  order  and  practice  of  the 
apostolic  churches,  which  had  been  corrupted  by  the 
tendencies  that  culminated  in  the  Papacy;  and  that 
traces  of  dissent  from  the  episcopal  power  are  found  in 
every  age.  (See  Punchard's  History  of  Congregational- 
ism.} The  origin  of  modern  Congregationalism  may 
be  traced  to  the  early  developments  of  the  Reformation 
in  England,  an  account  of  which  we  have  already  given. 
From  the  beginning  of  the  protest  against  Romanism, 
some  of  the  principal  distinctive  opinions,  afterwards 
developed  into  Congregational  polity,  especially  the 
identity  of  "bishop"  and  "presbyter,"  and  notably  the 
independent  right  of  each  congregation  to  chose  its  own 
"pastor"  and  exercise  discipline,  withoutthe  interposition 
of  council  or  bishop,  found  decided  advocates  and  un- 

(94) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  95 

flinching  adherents.  While  Henry  VIII.,  after  repudi- 
ating the  Romish  supremacy,  which  we  have  already 
noted,  adhered  to  the  essential  features  of  Romish 
theology,  and  in  part  to  Papal  polity  and  practice,  the 
advancement  of  enlightened  reason  continued  in  the 
opposite  direction.  When  the  reforms  conducted  by 
Edward  VI.,  already  noted  in  previous  chapters  of  this 
series,  were  peremptorily  brought  to  a  standstill  by 
Mary,  Queen  of  Scotland,  dissenting  congregations,  the 
forecast  substantially  of  modern  Congregationalism, 
came  immediately,  though  privately,  into  existence  in 
various  places,  as,  for  instance,  in  London  in  1555.  Their 
existence  is  learned  almost  entirely  from  persecutions 
to  which  their  members  were  subjected,  but  of  which 
few  particulars  are  preserved  in  history. 

Among  the  Congregational  martyrs  were  Barrowe, 
Greenwood  and  Penry,  executed  in  1593.  Of  the  Con- 
gregational Church  formed  in  London  in  1592,  of  which 
Francis  Johnson  was  "pastor,"  and  John  Greenwood 
"teacher,"  fifty-six  members  were  seized  and  impris- 
oned. Many  of  them  eventually  found  their  way  to 
Amsterdam,  where  they  re-organized  under  the  same 
pastor.  Robert  Brown's  publication,  in  1582,  of  "A 
Book  which  showeth  the  Life  and  Manners  of  all  true 
Christians,"  etc.,  presents  the  earliest  full  development 
of  the  Independent  side  of  Congregationalism.  While 
at  first  only  Puritans,  many  became  Separatists,  in 
despair  of  securing  complete  reformation  in  the  Church 
of  England.  About  the  year  1602  a  congregation  was 
organized  in  Gainesborough  in  Lincolnshire,  Rev.  John 
Smyth  pastor.  In  1606  another  congregation  was 
formed  at  Scrooby,  Nottinghamshire,  Richard  Clyton 
pastor,  which  met  at  the  house  of  William  Brewstcr. 
Of  that  congregation  John  Robinson  was  a  member^ 


96  ORIGIN  OF  CONGREGATIONALISM. 

and  afterwards  associate  pastor.  In  1606  Mr.  Smyth 
and  his  friends  removed  to  Amsterdam.  In  the  follow- 
ing year  Mr.  Clyton  and  many  of  his  church  members, 
after  enduring  great  persecution,  also  escaped  to  Am- 
sterdam, and  in  1608  the  majority  of  the  remaining 
members  of  the  Scroohy  congregation  followed.  After 
the  lapse  of  about  a  year  the  church  removed  to  Leyden. 
But  owing  to  the  disadvantage  of  residing  in  a  country 
of  different  language  and  customs  from  their  own,  they 
resolved  to  emigrate  to  America,  and  consequently  a 
portion  of  the  Leyden  Church,  with  Elder  William 
Brewster,  after  many  tedious  trials,  landed  at  Plymouth, 
Massachusetts,  Dec.  21,  1620  (N~.  S.),  while  Robinson, 
with  a  portion  of  the  congregation,  remained  at  Leyden. 
In  1616  a  Congregational  Church  was  established  at 
Southwark,  London,  under  the  care  of  Henry  Jacob, 
who  had  been  confirmed  in  Congregational  principles 
by  conference  with  John  Robinson  at  Leyden.  This 
congregation,  organized  after  Mr.  Jacob  had  conferred 
with  leading  Puritans,  probably  gathered  together 
some  of  the  scattered  members  of  Mr.  Johnson's  con- 
gregation. 

Though  sometimes  called  "the  first  Independent 
Church  in  England,"  there  had  been  in  existence  secret 
organizations  in  the  reign  of  Mary,  and  the  conffrega- 

o  «-_"  */   ?  O         O 

tions  of  Gainesborough  and  Scrooby,  and,  it  is  said, 
one  at  Duckenfield,  Cheshire  Co.  About  1624  Rev. 
John  Lathrop  became  pastor  of  the  Southwark  congre- 
gation. In  1632  he  was  imprisoned,  with  forty  others 
of  its  members.  In  1634  Mr.  Lathrop,  having  been 
released,  removed  to  America,  with  about  thirty  of  his 
flock,  and  in  that  year  organized  the  congregation  in 
Scituate,  Massachusetts,  where  he  continued  till  1639. 
when  the  majority  removed  to  West  Barns  table,  where 
that  congregation  is  still  existing 


AMERICAN  CONGREGATIONALISM. 


THE  history  of  the  American  Congregationalists  is 
pretty  well  known.  The  Plymouth  settlement  was 
distinct  in  origin  and  government  from  that  of  Massa- 
chusetts -Bay,  the  Pilgrim  settlers  heing  distinctively 
known  as  the  "Pilgrims."  The  persecutions  under 
Laud,  iu  the  Old  Country,  drove  many  Puritans  into 
the  resolution  to  emigrate.  Endicott  and  his  compan- 
ions began  the  colony  at  Salem,  Mass.,  in  1628,  and 
1630,  John  "Winthrop,  their  governor,  with  other  emi- 
grants, occupied  Boston  and  the  surrounding  towns. 
Settlements  were  made  at  Hartford  and  Saybrook,  in 
Connecticut,  in  1635,  and  in  1638,  Davenport  and  his 
associates  founded  the  New  Haven  colony,  while  in 
1633  a  distinct  company  reinforced  the  colonies  on  the 
Piscataqua  River.  The  Plymouth  congregation  had 
come  out  fully  organized;  in  the  other  settlements  con- 
gregations were  immediately  formed.  None  except  the 
Plymouth  people  had  come  to  America  as  Separatists; 
the  others  declared  that  they  did  not  separate  from  the 
Church  of  England,  but  that,  on  the  contrary,  they  only 
desired  to  expurgate  its  corruptions.  But,  having 
colonized  in  a  strange  and  far-away  country,  removed 
from  all  ecclesiastical  establishments,  and  searching  the 
Scriptures  as  the  basis  of  their  ecclesiastical  order,  they 
all  adopted  the  Congregational  Church  polity.  Most 
of  their  ministers  had  been  regularly  ordained  in  the 
9  (97) 


98  AMERICAN  CONGREGATIONALISM. 

Church  of  England,  and,  as  is  well  known,  were  a 
highly  educated  class  of  men,  as  (e.  g. )  Cotton  and 
Wilson,  of  Boston;  Mather,  of  Dorchester;  Hooker 
and  Stone,  of  Hartford;  Davenport  andHooke,  of  New 
Haven. 

American  Congregationalism  proper  received  its 
religious  form,  essentially,  in  the  early  religious  history 
of  New  England.  If  traced  to  the  writings  of  any  one 
person,  it  would  be  to  those  of  John  Robinson,  of  Ley- 
den;  those  of  John  Cotton  and  Thomas  Hooker,  in 
America,  being  next  in  importance.  Robert  Brown  was 
never  acknowledged  as  a  leader,  he  being  a  strict  and 
severe  Independent,  and,  finally,  returning  to  the  com- 
munion of  the  Church  of  England;  but,  at  the  same 
time,  it  is  conceded  that  his  writings  did  undoubtedly 
incite  many  minds  to  examine  and  reject  the  claims  of 
Episcopacy.  The  system,  -can  not,  however,  be  satisfac- 
torily traced  to  any  one  man,  but  rather  to  the  united 
sentiment  of  the  early  emigranfs,  who  agreed  in  carrying 
into  practice  the  opinion  that  every  congregation  is, 
according  to  the  Scriptures,  confined  to  the  limits  of  a 
single  or  individual  congregation,  and  that  it  must  be 
democratic  in  government;  while,  at  the  same  time,  all 
congregations  are  regarded  as  in  fellowship  with  one 
another.  Hence  the  term  "the  Congregational  Church" 
is  never  used  to  denote  the  denomination,  but  "  the 
Congregational  churches." 

Congregationalists  are  generally  Calvinistic  in  the- 
ology, although  in  the  United  States  there  is  an 
advanced  party  who  repudiate  distinctive  Calvinism. 
Congregationalists,  as  a  class,  hold  to  a  system  of  church 
government  which  embraces  these  two  fundamental 
principles,  viz.,  (1)  that  every  local  congregation  of 
believers,  united  for  worship,  and  for  observing  the 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  99 

"sacraments,"  and  for  the  enforcement  of  discipline,  is 
a  complete  church  within  itself,  and  can  not  be  subjected 
in  governmental  affairs  to  any  ecclesiastical  authority 
outside  of  itself;  and  (2)  that  all  such  local  congregations 
are  in  communion  with  one  another,  and  are  under 
moral  obligations  to  fulfill  all  the  duties  involved  in  such 
fellowship.  The  system  is  distinguished  from  Pres- 
byterianism  by  the  first,  and  from  Independency  by  the 
second.  It  involves  the  equal  right  of  all  the  members 
to  vote  in  all  governmental  affairs;  and  the  parity  of 
all  ministers,  the  ministers  being  set  apart  by  the  con- 
gregations, and  who,  as  ministers,  are  not  invested  with 
any  power  of  government,  but  who  have  official  power 
only  in  the  congregations  by  which  they  may  bo  chosen 
pastors.  It  is  seen  that  in  regard  to  the  independency 
(autonomy)  of  the  congregations,  the  Congregationalists 
occupy  nearly  the  same  position  as  that  which  is  held 
by  the  Disciples  of  Christ,  or  by  those  people  who  have 
in  reality  identified  the  Church  of  Christ  as  established 
by  the  apostles.  But  the  Congregationalists  are  not 
only  wrong  in  name,  viewed  from  the  angle  of  apostolic 
teaching,  but  they  are  wrong  in  doctrine,  which  is  made 
clear  by  the  fact  that  they  have,  in  common  with  all 
pedobaptists,  substituted  aspersion  and  rantism  for 
immersion,  and  practice  infant  baptism,  in  respect  to 
which  practices  they  are  not  a  whit  in  advance  of  the 
Romish  Church,  from  which  these  violations  of  the  law 
of  God  have  descended.  They  are  right  in  discarding 
councils,  Synods,  Conferences  and  Presbyteries,  and 
right  in  denying  all  ecclesiastical  authority  beyond  the 
individual  congregation,  but  they  are  decidedly  wrong 
in  changing  the  ordinances  of  Jesus  Christ.  As  means 
of  regeneration,  they  are  right  in  denying  the  alleged 
spiritual  influence  of  dreams,  and  visions,  and  psy- 


100  AMERICAN  CONGREGATIONALISM. 

chological  impressions,  and  all  hallucinations  of  the 
imagination,  but  as  an  exponent  of  the  true  Apostolic 
Church,  in  all  the  constituent  elements  of  the  one  body? 
the  Congregational  Church  is  materially  defective.  It 
is  not  built  exclusively  upon  the  basis  of  God's  "Word, 
and  hence  never  can  form  the  nucleus  of  Christian  unity, 
because,  if  a  system  is  found  to  be  defective  in  one  or 
more  parts,  it  must  be  rejected  as  a  whole.  A  system 
of  things  which  presumes  to  represent  the  divine  model 
and  at  the  same  time  incorporates  tradition  and  false 
dogmas,  professedly  on  the  principle  of  human  expedi- 
ency, and  with  a  view  of  conciliating  the  captious  and 
unregenerated  world,  can  never  hope  to  restore,  unim- 
paired, the  apostolic  order  of  things. 

Hence  the  necessity  of  the  existence  of  the  people 
known  as  the  Disciples  of  Christ,  who,  repudiating  all 
ecclesiastical  authority  outside  of  the  government  of 
Christ,  and  who,  rejecting  all  the  creeds  and  dogmas  of 
contradictory  and  self-consuming  sects,  plant  themselves 
exclusively  upon  the  inspired  Scriptures,  as  their  only 
reliable  and  infallible  guide,  and  as  their  only  rule  of 
faith  and  practice.  Their  tocsin  of  war  is  the  avowed 
destruction  of  all  sectism,  and  the  motto  of  the  banner 
they  bear  is  "one  Lord,  one  Faith  and  one  Baptism." 
They  regard  the  divisions  of  Christendom  as  a  positive 
sin,  and  also  as  the  prolific  source  of  infidelity.  They 
assume  that  "the  unity  of  the  Spirit"  can  only  secure 
"the  bond  of  peace" — a  permanent  and  lasting  peace — 
by  an  appeal  to  the  Holy  Scriptures,  as  the  only  source  of 
information  and  authority.  They  constantly  keep  before 
their  eyes  the  last  intercessory  prayer  of  our  Lord: 
"Neither  pray  I  for  these  alone  [the  apostles];  but  for 
them  also  who  shall  believe  on  me  through  their  word:  that 
they  all  may  be  one,  as  thou,  Father,  art  iu  me,  and  I  in 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  101 

thee ;  that  they  also  may  be  one  in  us :  that  the  world  may 
believe  that  thou  hast  sent  me."  We  hold  that  sinners 
can  only  be  saved,  and  church  unity  accomplished, 
through  the  words  of  the  apostles;  for  Christ  said  to 
the  apostles:  "Whoever  hears  you,  hears  me;  and 
whoever  hears  me,  hears  him  who  sent  me."  And  to 
the  Corinthians (2  Cor.  v.  20)  Paul  writes:  "Xow  then 
we  are  ambassadors  for  Christ,  as  though  God  did  be- 
seech you  by  us;  we  pray  you  in  Christ's  stead,  be  you 
reconciled  to  God."  Paul  said  to  Timothy,  "Preach  the 
Word,"  which  excludes  the  preaching  of  dogmas,  theo- 
ries, opinions,  Church  polities,  human  Creeds  and 
"Church  Standards." 


ORIGIN  OF  THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH. 


THE  origin  of  the  Baptist  Church  is  confessedly  ob- 
scure. It  is  a  difficult  and  involved  history  to  trace. 
The  Baptist  Church,  distinctively,  can  not  be  traced 
beyond  the  sixteenth  century.  It  is  purely  a  creation 
of  circumstances.  Its  incipient  developments  are  found 
in  the  religious  chaos  of  the  sixteenth  century.  In  the 
midst  of  all  the  diversities  of  opinion  that  existed  in 
'the  Reformation  of  that  eventful  period,  it  was  con- 
stantly maintained  by  Protestants  that  "  Holy  Scripture 
containeth  all  things  necessary  to  salvation,  so  that 
whatsoever  is  neither  read  therein  nor  may  be  proved 
thereby,  although  it  be  some  time  received  of  the  faith- 
ful as  godly  and  profitable  for  an  order  and  comeliness, 
yet  no  man  ought  to  be  constrained  to  believe  it  as  an 
article  of  faith  or  repute  it  requisite  to  the  necessity  of 
salvation."  (Articles  of  King  Edward  VI. )  The  oper- 
ation of  this  broad  principle  of  toleration  and  private 
judgment  was  denied  by  the  Church  of  Rome,  and, 
consequently,  those  who  adopted  this  principle,  mani- 
festly so  fair  and  equitable,  suffered  the  anathemas  of 
the  Papal  powers.  Each  separate  body  of  Protestants 
claimed  the  privilege  of  standing  on  the  basis  of  the 
Scriptures,  and  was  prepared  to  resist  alike  the  tyranny 
of  Rome  and  what  it  considered  the  license  of  other 
Protestant  sects.  Thus  it  came  to  pass  that  the  Bap- 
tists, or,  as  their  opponents  called  them,  the  Anabaptists 

(102) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  103 

(or,  as  Zwingle  names  them,  Catabaptists),  were  stren- 
uously opposed  by  all  other  sects  of  Protestantism,  and 
it  was  regarded  by  nearly  all  the  early  reformers  to  be 
the  duty  of  the  civil  magistrates  to  punish  them  with 
fine  and  imprisonment,  and  even  with  death,  as  an 
abundance  of  historical  documents  attest.  A  writer  in 
the  Encyclopaedia  Britannica  says:  "There  was,  no 
doubt,  some  justification  for  this  severity  in  the  fact 
that  the  fanaticism  which  burst  forth  in  the  early  times 
of  the  Reformation  frequently  led  to  insurrection  and 
revolt,  and  in  particular  that  the  leader  of  the  (  peasant 
war'  in  Saxony,  Thomas  Miinzer,  and  probably  many 
of  his  followers,  were  Anabaptists  both  on  the  continent 
and  in  this  country  (England)  are  very  few  and  meagre. 
Almost  all  that  is  currently  known  of  them  comes  to  us 
from  their  opponents." 

There  is,  however,  much  valuable  information,  to- 
gether with  detailed  accounts  of  their  sufferings,  in  the 
Dutch  Martyrology  of  Van  Braght,  himself  a  Baptist 
which  bears  the  title  Martalaers  Spiegel  der  Doopsgesinde. 
(2d  od.  fol.,  1685),  an  English  translation  of  the  latter 
half  of  which  was  published  in  two  vols.,  8vo.,  London, 
1850-53,  edited  by  Dr.  Underbill,  now  Secretary  of  the 
Baptist  Missionary  Society.  Probably  the  earliest  con- 
fession of  faith  of  any  Baptist  community  is  that  given 
by  Zwingle  in  the  second  part  of  his  Elenchus  contra 
Catabaptistas,  published  in  1527.  Zwingle  professes  to 
give  it  entire,  translating  it,  as  he  says,  ad  verbum  into 
Latin.  He  upbraids  his  opponents  with  not  having 
published  these  articles,  but  declares  that  there  is 
scarcely  any  one  of  them  that  has  not  a  written  (de- 
scriptum)  copy  of  these  laws  which  have  been  so  well 
concealed.  The  articles  are  in  all  seven.  The  first, 
which  we  give  in  full,  relates  to  baptism: 


104  ORIGIN  OF  TUB  BAPTIST  CHURCH. 

Baptism  ought  to  be  given  to  all  who  have  been  taught 
repentance  and  change  of  life,  and  who  in  truth,  believe 
that  through  Christ  their  sins  are  blotted  out  (abotild), 
and  the  sins  of  all  who  are  willing  (volunf)  to  walk  in 
the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  who  are  willing  to 
be  buried  with  him  into  death  (not  very  good  Baptist 
doctrine  in  the  present  age)  that  they  may  rise  again 
with  him.  To  all,  therefore,  who  in  this  manner  seek 
baptism,  and  of  themselves  ask  us,  we  will  give  it.  By 
this  rule  are  excluded  all  baptism  of  infants,  the  great 
abomination  of  the  Roman  poutiif.  For  this  article  we 
have  the  testimony  and  strength  of  Scripture,  we  have 
also  the  practice  of  the  apostles;  which  things  we  sim- 
ply and  also  steadfastly  will  observe,  for  we  are  assured 
of  them. 

The  second  article,  we  are  told  by  the  same  writer, 
relates  to  withdrawment  (abstentio)  or  excommunication, 
and  declares  that  all  who  have  given  themselves  to  the 
Lord  and  have  been  baptized  into  the  one  body  of  Christ 
should,  if  they  lapse  into  sin,  be  excommunicated. 
(The  Baptists  of  the  present  day  baptize  into  the  Bap- 
tist Church,  not  "into  the  one  body  of  Christ,"  as  the 
Disciples  of  Christ  teach).  The  third  article  relates  to 
the  breaking  of  bread;  in  this  it  is  declared  that  they 
who  break  the  one  bread  in  commemoration  of  the 
broken  body  of  Christ,  and  drink  of  the  one  cup  in 
commemoration  of  his  blood  poured  out,  must  first  be 
united  together  into  the  one  body  of  Christ,  that  is,  into 
the  Church  of  God — which  is  not  the  Baptist  Church 
of  the  present  day.  The  fourth  article  asserts  the  duty 
of  separation  from  the  world  and  its  abominations, 
among  which  are  included  all  papistical  and  semi- 
papistical  works.  The  fifth  relates  to  pastors  of  the 
congregation.  They  assert  that  the  pastor  should  be 
some  one  of  the  flock  who  has  a  good  report  from  those 
who  are  without.  "His  office  is  to  read,  admonish, 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  105 

teach,  learn,  exhort,  correct,  or  excommunicate  in  the 
church,  and  to  preside  well  over  all  the  brethren  and 
sisters,  both  in  prayer  and  in  the  breaking  of  bread; 
and  in  all  things  that  relate  to  the  body  of  Christ,  to 
watch  that  it  may  be  established  and  increased  so  that 
the  name  of  God  may  by  us  be  glorified  and  praised, 
and  that  the  mouth  of  blasphemers  may  be  stopped." 
The  sixth  article  relates  to  the  power  of  the  sword. 
"The  sword,"  they  say,  "is  the  ordinance  of  God  out- 
side the  perfection  of  Christ,  by  which  the  bad  is 
punished  and  slain,  and  the  good  is  defended."  They 
further  declare  that  a  Christian  ought  not  to  decide  or 
give  sentence  in  secular  matters,  and  that  he  ought  not 
to  exercise  the  office  of  magistrate.  The  seventh  article 
relates  to  oaths,  which  they  declare  are  forbidden  of 
Christ. 

It  is  here  proper  to  state,  for  the  benefit  of  the  general 
reader,  that  the  name  "Anabaptist"  means  one  baptism 
upon  another  baptism,  or  the  immersion  of  those  who 
have  been  sprinkled.  There  is  no  doubt  of  the  fact  that 
the  Anabaptists  suffered  terrible  persecution,  and  that 
all  sorts  of  epithets  of  abuse  and  calumny  were  heaped 
upon  their  devoted  heads.  Zwingle  styles  them  as 
"fanatical,  stolid,  audacious,  impious."  To  us,  at  the 
present  day,  who  enjoy  personal  liberty  and  religious 
toleration,  it  appears  as  shocking  as  it  is  wonderful, 
that  the  Protestant  council  of  Zurich,  which  had  with 
great  difficulty  won  its  own  liberty,  should  pass  a 
decree,  as  Zwingle  himself  reports,  that  any  person 
who  administers  anabaptism  should  be  drowned;  and 
still  more  shocking  that,  at  the  time  when  Zwingle 
wrote,  this  cruel  decree  should  have  been  carried  into 
effect  against  one  of  the  leaders  of  the  Anabaptists, 
Felix  Mantz,  who  himself  had  been  associated  with 


106  ORIGIN  OF  THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH. 

Zwingle,  not  only  as  a  student,  but  also  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  Reformation.  In  this  base  and  contemptible 
persecution,  the  reformers  of  the  sixteenth  century  have 
very  little  to  be  proud  of,  and  such  persecution  on  the 
part  of  the  reformers  only  goes  to  show  that  the  blight 
of  Romanism  still  clung  to  them,  as  it  still  does  to  their 
•descendants  of  the  present  day.  In  1537  Menno 
Sirnonis  united  with  the  Anabaptists  and  soon  distin- 
guished himself  as  their  acknowledged  leader.  His 
moderation  and  piety,  according  to  Mosheim,  held  in 
check  the  turbulent  spirit  of  the  more  fanatical  among 
them.  He  died  in  1561,  after  a  life  passed  amid  contin- 
ual dangers  and  conflicts.  His  name  remains  as  the 
ecclesiastical  designation  of  the  Mennonites,  who  event- 
ually settled  in  the  Netherlands  under  the  protection  of 
William  the  Silent,  Prince  of  Orange,  many  of  them 
emigrating  to  the  United  States,  and  settling  in  the 
Middle  and  Western  States,  where  their  descendants 
have  been  largely  absorbed  by  the  various  denomina- 
tions, though  some  remain  in  separate  bands,  here  and 
there,  who  have  become  wholly  indifferent  to  immer- 
sion. 

The  Encyclopaedia  Britannica  says  that  "of  the  intro- 
duction of  Baptist  views  into  England  we  have  no 
certain  knowledge."  Fox  relates  "that  the  registers  of 
London  make  mention  of  certain  Dutchmen  counted 
for  Anabaptists,  of  whom  ten  were  put  to  death  in  sun- 
dry places  in  the  realm,  anno  1535;  the  other  ten 
repented  and  were  saved."  In  1536  Henry  VIIL,  as 
"in  earth  supreme  head  of  the  Church  of  England," 
issued  a  proclamation  together  with  articles  concerning 
faith  agreed  upon  by  Convocation,  in  which  the  clergy 
are  told  to  instruct  the  people  that  they  ought  to  repute 
and  take  "the  Anabaptists'  opinions  for  detestable  her- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  107 

esies  and  to  be  utterly  condemned."  The  document  is 
given  in  extenso  by  Fuller,  who  further  tells  us  from 
Stow's  Chronicles  that,  in  the  year  1538,  "four  Anabap- 
tists, three  men  and  one  woman,  all  Dutch,  bare  fagots 
at  Paul's  Cross,  and  three  days  after  a  man  and  woman 
of  their  sect  \vere  burnt  in  Smithfield."  The  Anabap- 
tists united  in  communities  separate  from  the  Established 
Church.  Latimer,  in  1552,  speaks  of  them  as  segrega- 
ting themselves  from  the  company  of  other  men.  We 
have  not  space  to  follow  the  history  of  the  persecutions 
which  the  Anabaptists  endured  in  England  for  opinion's 
sake.  About  the  beginning  of  the  seventeenth  century 
the  severe  laws  against  the  Puritans  led  many  dissenters 
to  emigrate  to  Holland.  Some  of  these  were  Baptists, 
and  an  English  Baptist  Church  was  formed  in  Amster- 
dam about  the  year  1609.  In  1611  this  church  published 
"a  declaration  of  faith  of  English  people  remaining  at 
Amsterdam,  in  Holland."  The  article  relating  to  bap- 
tism is  as  follows:  "That  every  church  is  to  receive  in 
all  their  members  by  the  confession  of  their  faith  and 
sins  [Modern  Baptists  do  not  teach  this  apostolic  prac- 
tice, but  the  disciples  of  Christ  do,  mark  that],  wrought 
by  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  according  to  the  primi- 
tive institution  and  practice.  And  therefore,  churches 
constituted  after  any  other  manner  [mark  that  too],  or 
of  any  other  persons,  are  not  according  to  Christ's  test- 
ament. That  baptism  or  washing  with  water  is  the 
outward  manifestation  of  dying  unto  sin  and  walking 
in  newness  of  life;  and  therefore  in  nowise  appertainetli 
to  infants."  Many  members  of  the  Brownist  or  Inde- 
pendent denomination  held  baptist  views.  An  In- 
dependent congregation  in  London,  gathered  in  the 
year  1616,  included  several  such  persons,  and  as  the 
congregation  was  larger  than  could  conveniently  meet 


108  ORIGIN  OF  THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH. 

together  in  times  of  persecution,  they  agreed  to  allow 
these  persons  to  constitute  a  distinct  congregation, 
which  was  formed  on  the  12th  of  September,  1633;  and 
upon  this  the  majority,  if  not  all,  of  the  new  congrega 
tion  were  baptized.  Another  Baptist  Church  was 
formed  in  London,  in  1639.  These  churches  were 
"Particular"  or  Oalvinistic  Baptists.  The  church 
formed  in  1609  at  Amsterdam,  held  Arminian  views. 
In  1644  a  Confession  of  Faith  was  published  in  the 
names  of  seven  congregations  in  London,  "commonly 
(though  falsely)  called  Anabaptists,"  in  which  were  in- 
cluded the  two  congregations  just  mentioned.  The 
article  on  baptism  is  as  follows:  "That  baptism  is  an 
ordinance  of  the  New  Testament  given  by  Christ  to  be 
dispensed  only  upon  persons  professing  faith,  or  that 
are  disciples,  or  taught,  who,  upon  a  profession  of  faith 
[not  the  recital  of  a  dreamy  "experience,"  as  modern 
Baptists  hold],  ought  to  be  baptized."  "The  way  and 
manner  of  dispensing  this  ordinance  the  Scripture  holds 
out  to  be  dipping  or  plunging  the  whole  body  under 
water."  They  made  a  clear  distinction  between  the 
rights  of  conscience  and  the  rights  of  the  civil  magis- 
trates. 

After  showing  their  willingness  to  yield  "subjection 
and  obedience  "  to  the  magistrates,  as  unto  the  Lord, 
and  after  indulging  the  hope  that  God  would  "incline 
the  magistrates'  hearts  so  far  to  tender  our  consciences 
as  that  we  might  be  protected  by  them  from  wrong, 
injury,  oppression,  and  molestation,"  they  proceed  to 
say :  "  But  if  God  withhold  the  magistrates'  allowance 
and  furtherance  herein,  yet  we  must,  notwithstanding, 
proceed  together  in  Christian  communion,  not  daring 
to  give  place  to  suspend  our  practice,  but  to  walk  in 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  109 

obedience  to  Christ  in  the  profession  and  holding  forth 
this  faith  before  mentioned,  even  in  the  midst  of  all 
trials  and  afflictions,  not  accounting  our  goods,  lands, 
wives,  children,  fathers,  mothers,  brethren,  sisters,  yea, 
and  our  own  lives,  dear  unto  us,  so  that  we  may  finish 
our  course  with  joy;  remembering  always  that  we  ought 
to  obey  God  rather  than  men."  They  close  their  Con- 
fession thus:  "If  any  take  this  that  we  have  said  to  be 
heresy,  then  do  we  with  the  apostle  freely  confess,  that 
after  the  way  which  they  call  heresy  worship  we  the 
God  of  our  fathers,  believing  all  things  which  are 
written  in  the  Law  and  in  the  Prophets  and  Apostles, 
desiring  from  our  souls  to  disclaim  all  heresies  and 
opinions  which  are  not  after  Christ,  and  to  be  steadfast, 
immovable,  always  abounding  in  the  work  of  the  Lord, 
as  knowing  our  labor  shall  not  be  in  vain  in  the  Lord." 
This  breathing  spell,  however,  was  not  of  long  continu- 
ance, for  soon  after  the  Restoration,  in  1660,  the  meetings 
of  Nonconformists  were  continually  disturbed  by  the 
constables,  and  their  preachers  were  carried  before  the 
magistrates  and  fined  or  imprisoned,  of  which  numerous 
instances  could  be  given. 

The  history  of  the  persecution  of  Baptists,  as  well  as 
of  other  Protestant  dissenters,  ceases  with  the  Revolu- 
tion of  1688,  and  the  passing  of  the  Act  of  Toleration 
in  1689.  The  removal  of  the  remaining  disabilities, 
such  as  those  imposed  by  the  Test  and  Corporation 
Acts  repealed  in  1828,  has  no  special  bearing  on 
Baptists  more  than  on  other  Nonconformists.  The 
ministers  of  the  "three  denominations  of  dissenters "- 
Presbyterians,  Independents  and  Baptists — resident  in 
London  and  the  neighborhood,  had  the  privilege  ac- 
corded to  them  of  presenting  on  proper  occasions  an 


110  ORIGIN  OP  THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH. 

address  to  the  sovereign  in  state,  a  privilege  which  they 
still  enjoy. 

It  is  unfortunate  that  modern  Baptists  have  not 
carried  out  the  principles  of  reform  as  proclaimed  by 
the  Baptists  of  the  seventeenth  century,  who  verged 
very  close  upon  apostolic  restoration;  for  we  see  in  the 
history  of  the  early  Baptists  that  they,  upon  profession 
of  faith,  baptized  believers  into  the  one  body  of  Christ, 
and  that,  too,  without  postponement.  The  early  Bap- 
tists depended  upon  the  word  of  God  as  the  source  of 
enlightenment,  regeneration  and  sanctification,  and  not 
on  a  "Christian  experience" — not  on  special  illumina- 
tion without  the  word  of  God — not  on  the  mystic  and 
twistic  operations  of  an  abstract  Spirit,  out  of  which 
theory  of  conversion  have  come,  in  the  modern  Baptist 
Church,  illusions,  hallucinations,  seusuistic  impressions, 
ecstasies,  dreams  and  many  other  vagaries.  The  Bap- 
tists of  the  seventeenth  century  had  a  clearer  perception 
of  apostolic  teaching,  had  a  more  comprehensive  view 
or  grasp  of  the  scheme  of  redemption,  and  approxi- 
mated more  nearly  the  New  Testament  order  of  things, 
than  the  modern  school  of  Baptists,  who  have  been 
spoiled  by  contact  with  pedobaptist  "orthodoxy" — by 
contact  with  "Evangelical  Churches" — whose  smiles 
they  court,  and  whose  ill-will  they  seek  to  propitiate. 
The  earlier  Baptists  did  not  baptize  into  the  Baptist 
Church,  as  is  the  modern  practice,  but  they  baptized 
believing  penitents  "into  the  one  body  of  Christ," 
which  sounds  exactly  like  apostolic  teaching.  We  read 
of  no  monthly  meetings  called  for  the  examination  of 
converts  who  gave  an  "experience"  of  something  that 
never  occurred,  except  in  the  imagination  of  the  con- 
vert; nor  do  we  read  that  their  "experience,"  wrought 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  Ill 

by  the  strivings  of  a  "still  small  voice,"  was  taken  as 
an  evidence  of  pardon;  nor  do  we  read  of  sinners  being 
pardoned  before  immersion  into  the  one  body;  nor  do 
we  learn  from  .the  records  that  they  held  monthly  com- 
munion seasons,  instead  of  communing  on  every  first 
day  of  the  week. 


THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH  IK  THE  UNITED 

STATES. 


WE  continue  our  observations  upon  the  origin  and 
history  of  the  Baptist  Church.  Some  writers  (as,  for 
instance,  Orchard,  in  his  History  of  Foreign  Baptists, 
London,  1838)  have  attempted  to  trace  an  uninterrupted 
succession  of  Baptist  churches  from  the  time  of  the 
apostles  down  to  the  present.  He  gives  as  the  sum- 
ming up  of  his  researches,  that  "all  Christian  commun- 
ities during  the  first  three  centuries  were  of  the  Baptist 
denomination  in  constitution  and  practice.  In  the 
middle  of  the  third  century  the  Novation  Baptists 
established  separate  and  independent  societies,  which 
continued  until  the  end  ot  the  sixth  age,  when  these 
communities  were  succeeded  by  the  Paterines,  which 
continued  until  the  Reformation  (1517).  The  Oriental 
Baptist  churches  with  their  successors,  the  Paulicians, 
continued  in  their  purity  until  the  tenth  century,  when 
they  visited  France,  resuscitating  and  extending  the 
Christian  profession  in  Languedoc,  where  they  flour- 
ished till  the  crusading  army  scattered,  or  drowned  in 
blood,  one  million  of  unoffending  professors.  The 
Baptists  in  Piedmont  and  Germany  are  exhibited  as  ex- 
isting under  different  names  down  to  the  Reformation. 
These  churches,  with  their  genuine  successors,  the 
Mennonites  of  Holland,  are  connectedly  and  chronolog- 
ically detailed  to  the  present  period.'' 

We   showed  in  a   previous   article  that   the   Baptist 

(112) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  113 

Church  could  not  he  traced  beyond  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury, and  that  the  Church,  or  sect  rather,  had  its  rise 
among  the  Anahaptists.  As  a  contradiction  of  Orchard's 
assumptions  THE  CHRISTIAN  REVIEW  (January,  1855,  p. 
23),  the  leading  Baptist  Quarterly  of  America,  speaks 
as  follows: 

"We  know  of  no  assumption  more  arrogant,  and 
more  destitute  of  proper  historic  support,  than  that 
which  claims  to  be  able  to  trace  the  distinct  and  un- 
broken existence  of  a  church  substantially  Baptist  from 
the  time  of  the  apostles  down  to  our  own."  Thus  also 
Cutting  (Historic  Vindications,  Boston,  1859,  p.  14) 
remarks  on  such  attempts:  "I  have  little  confidence  in 
the  results  of  any  attempt  of  that  kind  which  have  met 
my  notice,  and  I  attach  little  value  to  inquiries  pursued 
for  the  predetermined  purpose  of  such  a  demonstra- 
tion." 

The  Baptist  churches  in  the  United  States  owe  their 
origin  to  Roger  Williams,  who,  before  his  immersion, 
was  an  Episcopalian  minister.  He  was  persecuted  for 
opposing  the  authority  of  the  State  in  ecclesiastical 
affairs  and  for  principles  which  "tended  to  Anabap- 
tism."  In  1639  he  was  immersed  by  Ezekiel  Holliman, 
and  in  turn  immersed  Holliman  and  ten  others,  who 
with  him  organized  a  Baptist  Church  at  Providence, 
Rhode  Island.  A  few  years  before  (1635),  though  un- 
known to  Williams,  a  Baptist  preacher  of  England, 
Hansard  Knollys,  had  settled  in  JSTew  Hampshire  and 
taken  charge  of  a  church  in  Dover:  but  he  resigned  in 
1639  and  returned  to  England.  Williams  obtained  in 
1644,  a  charter  for  the  colony  which  he  and  his  asso- 
ciates had  founded  in  Rhode  Island,  with  full  and 
entire  freedom  of  conscience.  Rhode  Island  thus 
became  the  first  Christian  State  which  ever  granted  full 
religious  liberty.  In  other  British  colonies  the  persecu- 
tion against  the  Baptists  continued  a  long  time.  Mass- 
achusetts issued  laws  against  them  in  1644,  imprisoned 
10 


114          THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES. 

several  Baptists  in  1651,  and  banished  others  in  1669. 
In  1680,  the  doors  of  a  Baptist  meeting-house  were 
nailed  up.  In  New  York  laws  were  issued  against 
them  in  1662,  in  Virginia  in  1664.  With  the  beginning 
of  the  eighteenth  century  the  persecution  greatly  abated. 
They  were  released  from  tithes  in  1727  in  Massachusetts, 
in  1729  in  New  Hampshire  and  Connecticut,  but  not 
before  1785  in  Virginia.  The  spread  of  their  principles 
was  greatly  hindered  by  these  persecutions,  especially 
in  the  South,  where  in  1776  they  counted  about  one 
hundred  societies.  After  the  Revolution  they  spread 
with  extraordinary  rapidity,  especially  in  the  South  and 
Southwest,  and  \vere  inferior  in  this  respect  only  to  the 
Methodists.  In  1817,  a  triennial  general  convention 
was  organized,  which,  however,  has  since  been  discon- 
tinued. In  1845,  the  discussion  of  the  slavery  question 
led  to  a  division  of  the  Northern  and  Southern  Baptists. 
The  destruction  of  slavery,  in  consequence  of  the  failure 
of  the  Great  Rebellion  and  the  adoption  of  the  consti- 
tutional amendment  in  1865,  led  to  efforts  to  reunite 
the  societies  of  the  Northern  and  Southern  States. 
The  Northern  associations  generally  expressed  a  desire 
to  corporate  again  with  the  Southern  brethren  in  the 
fellowship  of  Christian  labor,  but  they  demanded  from 
the  Southern  associations  a  profession  of  loyalty  to  the 
United  States  Government,  and  they  themselves  deemed 
it  necessary  to  repeat  the  testimony  which,  during  the 
war,  they  had,  at  each  annual  meeting,  borne  against 
slavery.  The  Southern  associations  that  met  during 
the  year  1865,  were  unanimously  in  favor  of  continuing 
their  former  separate  societies,  and  against  fraternizing 
with  the  Northern  societies.  They  censured  the  Amer- 
ican Baptist  Home  Missionary  Society  for  proposing, 
without  consultation  or  co-operation  with  the  churches, 
associations,  conventions  or  organized  Boards  of  the 
Southern  States,  to  appoint  ministers  and  missionaries 
to  preach  and  raise  churches  within  the  bounds  of  the 
Southern  associations.  Some  of  the  Southern  associa- 
tions, like  that  of  Virginia,  consequently  advised  the 
churches  "to  decline  any  co-operation  or  fellowship 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  115 

with  any  of  the  missionaries,  ministers,  or  agents  of  the 
American  Baptist  Home  Mission  Society.'"'  A  number 
of  negro  Baptist  churches  in  the  Southern  States  separ- 
ated from  the  Southern  associations,  and  either  connected 
themselves  with  those  of  the  North,  or  organized,  with 
the  co  operation  of  the  Northern  missionaries,  inde- 
pendent associations.  (McClintock  and  Strong's  Bib. 
Theo.,  and- EC.  Enc.,  vol.  i.  p.  654). 

In  the  United  States  the  Baptist  family  is  divided 
into  the  "Regular  Baptists,"  or  Missionary  Baptists, 
Seventh-day  Baptists,  Anti-mission  Baptists,  Free- Will 
Baptists,  and  Six  Principle  Baptists.  The  Free  or  Open 
Communion  Baptists,  who  were  organized  about  1810, 
united  in  1841  with  the  Free- Will  Baptists. 

The  Baptists  have  no  standard  Confession  of  Faith. 
The  congregation  being  independent  as  to  govern- 
mental affairs,  each  adopts  its  own  articles  of  belief. 
In  England  the  "Old  Connection"  are  chiefly  Socin- 
ians;  the  "New  Connection,"  evangelical  Arminians; 
the  "Particular  Baptists,"  Calvinists  of  various  shades. 
In  the  United  States,  the  Regular  Baptists  are  for  the 
most  part  Calvinists.  The  Baptists  generally  form 
"Associations,"  which,  however,  exercise  no  jurisdic- 
tion over  the  churches.  They  recognize  no  higher 
church  officers  than  pastors  and  deacons.  Elders  are 
sometimes  ordained  as  evangelists  and  missionaries. 
Though  Regular  Baptists  accept  of  no  authority  other 
than  the  Bible  for  their  faith  and  practice,  yet  nearly  all 
of  the  societies  have  a  confession  of  faith  in  pamphlet 
form  for  distribution  among  its  members.  The  "New 
Hampshire  Confession  of  Faith,"  which  contains  nine- 
teen Articles,  is  more  generally  used  among  the  societies 
in  the  North  and  East,  while  the  "Philadelphia  Confes- 
sion of  Faith,"  which  embodies  twenty-five  Articles,  is 
the  one  generally  adopted  in  the  South.  The  American 


116          THE  BAPTIST  CIIURCII  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES. 

Baptist  churches  are  more  rigid  on  the  question  of  "  close 
communion"  than  are  the  British  Baptist  churches. 
The  German  Baptists  of  America,  commonly  known  as 
Dunkers,  but  who  denominate  themselves  Brethren, 
originated  at  Schwarzenan,  in  Germany,  in  1708,  were 
driven  by  persecution  to  America,  between  the  years 
1719  and  1729.  They  purposely  neglect  any  record  of 
their  proceedings,  and  are  opposed  to  statistics,  which 
they  believe  to  foster  pride.  They  originally  settled  in 
Pennsylvania,  but  are  now  most  numerous  in  Ohio  and 
Indiana. 

The  regular  Baptists,  unlike  most  of  the  Protestant 
denominations,  have  no  distinctive  creed  which  is  made 
a  test  of  fellowship.  They  have,  however,  a  "visible 
church"  and  an  "invisible  church,"  which  duplex  order 
of  things,  unlike  the  Church  of  Christ  as  founded  by 
his  apostles,  is  the  source  of  much  confusion  and  mys- 
ticism. The  spiritual  birth,  as  taught  by  Baptists, brings 
sinners  into  the  "invisible  church,"  while,  at  the  same 
time,  regenerated  sinners  in  the  "invisible  church,"  can 
not  come  into  the  "visible  church" — into  the  Baptist 
Church — until  they  are  immersed  !  To  say  the  least, 
this  is  not  New  Testament  teaching.  Though  Baptists 
may  not  intend  it,  this  is  a  practical  denial  that  baptism, 
as  the  consummating  act  in  the  divine  processes  for  the 
remission  of  sins — a  positive  contradiction  of  the  words 
of  the  apostle  Peter  on  the  day  of  Pentecost.  Baptists 
teach  that  sinners  are  directly  illuminated  and  regener- 
ated by  the  special  and  mystic  influence  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  without  the  mediation  of  the  Word  of  God,  and 
that  a  special  grace,  not  revealed  in  the  gospel,  is  nec- 
essary to  convict  and  convert  the  sinner.  This  is  a  prac- 
tical nullification  of  "the  gospel"  as  "  the  power  of  God 
unto  salvation  to  all  them  who  believe. "  They  claim 


*  REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  117 

that  by  the  direct  regenerating  influence  of  the  Spirit, 
the  convicted  sinner  is  made  conscious,  without  the  test- 
imony of  God's  word,  of  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  and  of 
justification,  and  of  adoption  into  the  family  of  God — 
into  the  "invisible  church."  He  is  called  upon  to  give 
a  "  Christian  experience,"  of  what  he  saw  and  felt,  as 
an  evidence  of  pardon,  thus  setting  aside  the  Word  of 
Ck>d,  or  the  law  of  pardon  in  the  gospel,  as  the  only 
revealed  evidence.  The  convert  tells  what  the  Lord  has 
done  for  him  through  the  strivings  of  the  Spirit,  and 
instead  of  relying  on  the  testimonies  of  God's  word  for 
evidence  of  pardon,  such  r.s  was  preached  by  the  apos- 
tles, he  revels  in  dreams  and  fancies,  and  substitutes  his 
feelings,  called  a  "Christian  experience,"  for  the  law  of 
pardon,  as  proclaimed  by  the  apostles  in  the  name  of 
Jesus  Christ. 

According  to  such  mystical  teaching,  the  sinner  is 
regenerated,  born  of  God,  saved,  justified,  sanctified, 
adopted,  and  made  a  child  of  God  without  the  birth  of 
baptism !  And  yet  this  alleged  child  of  God — directly 
regenerated  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  saved  from  his  sins, 
justified,  sanctified  and  adopted  —  can  not  enter  the 
Baptist  Church — the  "visible  church" — until  he  is  im- 
mersed! Here  is  the  startling  disclosure  made  that  im- 
mersion is  a  "non-essential"  in  constituting  a  sinner  a 
child  of  God — a  citizen  of  the  "invisible  kingdom" — but 
that  in  order  to  become  a  child  in  the  Baptist  family — a 
member  in  the  "visible  church" — immersion  is  made 
very  essential!  Such  mystical  teaching  did  not  obtain 
in  the  apostolic  church,  and  hence  we  have  good  reason 
for  rejecting  it.  As  neither  Christ  nor  the  apostles  ever 
founded  a  Baptist  Church,  nor  taught  the  direct  agency 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  conversion  of  sinners,  nor 
appointed  "monthly  meetings"  where  converts  might. 


118          THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES. 

give  the  "experience"  of  iheir  feelings  as  an  evidence 
of  pardon,  nor  appointed  the  celebration  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  but  once  a  month,  we  reject  all  such  theology  as 
unscriptural  and  non-apostolic.  By  such  dreamy  spec- 
ulation, and  with  no  other  evidence  but  the  feelings  of 
the  misguided  sinner,  the  Baptists  contradict  (through 
ignorance  of  the  plan  of  salvation,  it  may  be)  the  doc- 
trine that  the  Word  of  God  is  the  "sword  of  the  Spirit" 
which  "kills  and  makes  alive."  Surely  with  such  evi- 
dence before  us,  we  dare  not  say  that  the  Baptist  Church 
is  identical  with  the  Church  of  Christ,  which  the  apos 
ties  founded,  and  who  made  immersion  into  the  name 
of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
essential  to  salvation,  a  doctrine  which  the  Baptist 
Church  ignores. 


ORIGIN  OF  METHODISM. 


JOHN  WESLEY,  the  founder  of  Methodism,  was  born 
at  Epworth,  Lincolnshire,  England,  June  17,  1703.  He 
was  raised  in  the  Church  of  England,  was  ordained  a 
priest  in  1728,  by  Bishop  Potter,  and  died  an  Episco- 
palian. At  the  age  of-thirty-fi  ve  he  was  scarcely  known 
beyond  the  academic  circles  of  Oxford.  From  child- 
hood he  was  deeply  devout  and  religious  and  conscien- 
tious, which  characteristics  he  inherited  from  a  mother 
of  superior  endowments  and  of  rare  excellency  of  char- 
acter. His  love  of  learning  was  very  strong,  and  he 
was  very  studious  at  college,  but  "his  poverty  held  him 
back  from  the  costly  vices  which  enslaved  many  of  his 
college  companions."  It  is  said  by  one  of  his  biograph- 
ers that  his  uncommonly  fine  traits  of  character,  and 
his  narrow,  not  to  say  marvelous,  escape  from  the  burn- 
ing rectory  when  he  was  six  years  of  age,  gave  birth  in 
the  mind  of  his  mother  to  an  impression  that  this  child 
was  destined  to  an  extraordinary  career.  She  therefore 
consecrated  him  to  God  with  special  solemnity,  resolv- 
ing "to  be  more  particularly  careful  .  .  to  instill  into 
his  mind  the  principles  of  religion  and  virtue."  He 
received  some  of  his  first  religious  impressions  while 
reading  the  Christian's  Pattern,  by  Thomas  a  Kempis. 
The  perusal  of  Law's  Christian  Perfection  and  Serious 
Call  deepened  these  convictions,  "and  led  him  to  devote 
himself,  soul,  body  and  substance,  to  the  service  of 

(119) 


120  ORIGIN  OF  METHODISM. 

God."  "But,  owing  to  his  failure  to  comprehend  the 
scriptural  doctrine  of  salvation  by  faith  only,  he  groped 
in  the  dark  through  thirteen  years  of  ascetic  self-denial, 
ritualistic  observances,  unceasing  prayer,  and  works  of 
charity,  before  he  gained  an  assurance  that  God,  for 
Christ's  sake,  had  pardoned  his  sins."  And  his  change 
of  heart,  "through  those  long,  wearisome,  comfortless 
years  of  seeking  God  without  finding  him,"  is  thus  re- 
lated : 

And  when,  on  his-  voyage  to  Savannah  (Ga.),  he  saw 
some  pious  Moravians  rejoicing,  while  he  was  shaken 
with  fears  of  death,  amid  the  fury  of  a  storm  which 
apparently  was  driving  them  into  the  jaws  of  destruc- 
tion, he  did  not  suspect  that  his  fear  was  the  fruit  of 
his  erroneous  views.  He  talked  much  with  some  of  the 
Moravian  brethren  after  his  arrival  in  Savannah;  but  it 
was  not  until  after  his  return  to  England  in  1738,  that 
Peter  Bohler,  a  Moravian  preacher  in  London,  after 
much  conversation,  aided  by  the  testimonies  of  several 
living  witnesses,  convinced  him  that  to  gain  peace  of 
mind  he  must  renounce  that  dependence  upon  his  own 
works  which  had  hitherto  been  the  bane  of  his  expe- 
rience, and  replace  it  with  a  full  reliance  on  the  blood 
of  Christ  shed  for  him.  To  gain  this  faith  he  strove 
with  all  possible  earnestness.  And  at  a  Moravian  So- 
ciety meeting  in  Aldersgate  Street,  while  one  was  read- 
ing Luther's  statement  of  the  change  which  God  works 
in  the  heart  through  faith,  Wesley  says,  "I  felt  my 
heart  strangely  warmed.  I  felt  I  did  trust  in  Christ, 
Christ  alone,  for  salvation;  and  an  assurance  was  given 
me  that  he  had  taken  away  my  sins,  even  mi?ie,  and 
saved  me  from  the  law  of  sin  and  death."  (Rev.  D. 
Wise,  D.D.,  in  McClintock  and  Strong's  Enc.,  Vol.  VI., 
p.  913.) 

In  November,  1729,  the  Wesley  brothers,  Whitefield 
and  their  associates,  about  a  dozen  young  men,  students 
of  Oxford  University — formed  themselves  into  a  society 
for  purposes  of  mutual  moral  and  spiritual  improve- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  121 

ment.  As  members  of  the  Church  of  England,  which 
had  lost  all  love  of  souls  and  all  desire  for  spiritual  life 
through  formalism  and  ritualism,  these  young  men 
sought  to  excite  new  life  into  a  dead  body,  and  to 
stimulate  piety  among  a  people  where  none  existed. 
In  view  of  the  corrupt  and  lifeless  condition  of  the 
Church  of  England,  they  voluntarily  abandoned  them- 
selves to  a  life  of  self-denial  and  personal  consecration. 
By  instructing  the  children  of  the  neglected  poor;  by 
visiting  the  sick  and  the  inmates  of  prisons  and  alms- 
houses;  by  a  strict  observance  of  the  fasts  appointed 
by  the  Church,  and  by  scrupulous  exactness  in  their 
attendance  upon  public  worship,  they  became  objects 
of  general  notice.  They  were  severely  criticised  and 
treated  with  contempt  by  their  formalistic  contempora- 
ries, and,  as  is  usual  in  such  cases,  their  sincerity  called 
in  question  by  mockers  and  scoffers.  Even  by  their 
fellow-students  they  were  called  in  turn,  Sacramentarians, 
Bible-bigots,  Bible-moths,  the  Godly  Club.  One,  a  student 
of  Christ-Church  College,  with  greater  reverence  than 
his  fellows,  and  more  learning,  observed,  in  regard  to 
their  methodical  manner  of  life,  that  a  new  sect  of 
METHODISTS  had  sprung  up,  alluding  to  the  ancient 
school  of  physicians  known  by  that  name.  The  appel- 
lation obtained  currency,  and  although  the  title  is  still 
sometimes  used  reproachfully  as  expressive  of  enthu- 
siasm, or  undue  religious  strictness,  it  has  become  the 
acknowledged  designation  of  one  of  the  largest  bodies 
of  religious  people  of  modern  times. 

"Wesley's  idea  at  this  time,  and  for  many  years  after- 
wards," says  Keats  (History  of  the  Free  Churches  of  En- 
gland, p.  363),  "was  merely  to  revive  the  state  of  religion 
in  the  Church;  but  he  knew  enough  of  the  condition 
of  society  in  England,  and  of  human  nature,  to  be 
11 


122  ORIGIN  OF  METHODISM. 

aware  that  unless  those  who  had  been  brought  under 
the  awakening  influence  of  the  gospel  met  together, 
and  assisted  each  other  in  keeping  alive  the  fire  which 
had  been  lit  in  their  hearts,  it  must,  in  many  instances, 
seriously  diminish,  if  not  altogether  die  out."  By  this 
fact  it  will  be  seen  that  it  was  no  part  of  the  design  of 
"Wesley  and  his  associates  to  found  a  new  religious  sect. 
"He  considered  them  all  members  of  the  Church  of 
England  —  zealous  for  her  welfare,  and  loyal  to  her 
legitimate  authorities."  So  says  a  Methodist  authority, 
because  such  are  the  facts  of  history. 


ORIGIN"  OF  THE  METHODIST  EPISCOPAL 
CHURCH. 


THE  Methodist  Episcopal  Church  of  the  United  States 
received  its  official  title,  as  a  distinct  body,  at  what  is 
historically  known  as  the  "  Christian  Conference,"  which 
began  its  sessions  in  Baltimore,  on  Friday,  December 
24,  1784.  The  first  Methodist  service  in  America  is 
supposed  to  have  been  held  in  the  year  1766,  in  the  city 
of  ~New  York,  by  Philip  Embury,  an  Irish  emigrant  and 
local  preacher,  a  carpenter  by  trade,  who  was  moved 
thereto  by  the  stirring  appeals  of  Barbara  Heck,  an 
Irish  woman,  whose  name  is  illustrious  in  the  annals  of 
the  denomination.  In  the  course  of  a  year  or  two,  their 
numbers  had  considerably  increased,  and  they  wrote  to 
John  Wesley  requesting  him  to  send  them  out  some 
competent  preachers.  Two  at  once  offered  themselves 
for  the  work,  Richard  Boardman  and  Joseph  Pilmoor, 
who  were  followed  in  1771  by  Francis  Asbury  and  Rich- 
ard Wright.  The  agitations  preceding  the  War  of  In- 
dependence, which  soon  afterwards  broke  out,  inter- 
rupted the  labors  of  the  English  Methodist  preachers 
in  America,  all  of  whom,  with  the  exception  of  Asbury, 
returned  to  England  before  the  close  of  the  year  1777; 
but  their  place  appears  to  have  been  supplied  by  others 
of  native  origin,  and  they  continued  to  prosper,  so  that, 
at  the  termination  of  the  Revolutionary  struggle,  they 
numbered -forty-three  preachers  and  13,740  members. 

(123) 


124       ORIGIN   OF    THE    METHODIST    EPISCOPAL   CHURCH. 

Up  to  this  time,  the  American  Wesley  an  Methodists 
had  laid  no  claim  to  being  a  distinct  religious  organiza- 
tion.    Like  Wesley  himself,  they  regarded  themselves 
as  members  of  the  English  Episcopal  Church,  or  rather 
of  that  branch  of  it  then  existing  in  this  country,  and 
their  preachers  as  a  body  of  irregular  auxiliaries  to  the 
ordained  clergy.      It  is  said  that  "Episcopal  churches 
are  still  standing  in  New  York  (or  were  but  a  few  years 
since)  and  elsewhere,  at  whose  altars  Embury,  Pilmoor, 
Boardman,  Strawbridge,  Asbury  and  Rankin,  the  earli- 
est Methodist  preachers,  received  the  holy  communion." 
But  the  recognition  of  the  United  States  as  an   inde- 
pendent country,    and   the    difference   of    feeling   and 
interests   that  necessarily  sprung  up  between  the  con- 
gregations in  America  and  those  in  England,  rendered 
the   formation   of    an   independent   society   inevitable. 
Wesley  became  conscious  of  this,   and  met  the  emer- 
gency  in   a   manner   as    bold   as    it   was    unexpected. 
Himself  only  a  presbyter  in  the  Church  of  England,  he 
persuaded  himself  that  in  the  primitive  Church  a  pres- 
byter and  a  bishop  were  one  and  the  same  order,  differ- 
ing only  as  to  their  official  function,  he,  assuming  the 
office  of  the   latter,  and,  with  the   assistance  of  some 
other  presbyters  who   had  joined   his   movement,    set 
apart  and  ordained  Rev.   Thomas  Coke,  D.   C.  L.,  of 
Oxford  University,  bishop  of  the  infant   church,  Sep- 
tember 2,  1784.     Coke  immediately  sailed  for  America, 
and   appeared,  with  his  credentials,  at  the  Conference 
held   at  Baltimore,  December  25th,   of  the  same  year. 
He  was   unanimously  recognized   by  the    assembly   of 
preachers,  appointed  Asbury  coadjutor  bishop,  and  or- 
dained several  preachers  to  the  offices  of  deacon   and 
elder.      Wesley  also  granted  the  preachers  permission 
(which    shows   the   extensive    ecclesiastical'  power    he 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  125 

wielded)  to  organize  a  separate  and  independent  church 
under  the  Episcopal  form  of  government:  hence  arose 
the  "Methodist  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States 
of  America." 

To  facilitate  the  work  of  Coke  and  Asbury,  "Wesley 
furnished  them  with  a  "Sunday  Service,"  or  liturgy,  a 
collection  of  songs  and  hymns,  and  also  "The  Articles 
of  Religion,"  twenty-four  of  them,  which  he  selected 
from  the  Thirty-nine  Articles  of  the  Book  of  Prayer, 
and  which  he  revised  for  the  benefit  of  the  churches  in 
the  United  States.  Upon  the  arrival  of  Coke  in 
America,  accompanied  by  his  ordained  elders  and  dea- 
cons (he  being  ordained  by  "Wesley  "superintendent" — 
afterwards  tortured  into  bishop),  a  special  conference  or 
convention  of  the  itinerant  preachers  was  summoned, 
and  on  the  24th  of  December,  sixty  of  them  assembled 
in  the  Lovely  Lane  Chapel  in  the  city  of  Baltimore. 
Dr.  Coke  took  the  chair,  and  presented  the  following 
letter  from  Wesley,  written  eight  days  after  the  ordina- 
tions, and  tersely  stating  the  grounds  of  what  he  had 
done  and  advised.  As  this  letter  contains  the  pith  of 
Episcopal  Methodism,  we  give  it  entire: 

To  Dr.   Coke,  Mr.  Asbury,  and   our  Brethren  in  North 

America : 

By  a  very  numerous  train  of  providences,  many  of 
the  provinces  of  North  America  are  totally  disjoined 
from  their  mother  country,  and  erected  into  independ- 
ent States.  The  English  government  has  no  authority 
over  them,  either  civil  or  ecclesiastical,  any  more  than 
over  the  States  of  Holland.  A  civil  authority  is  exer- 
cised over  them,  partly  by  the  Congress  and  partly  by 
the  provincial  assemblies;  but  no  one  either  exercises 
or  claims  any  ecclesiastical  authority  at  all.  In  this 
peculiar  situation,  some  thousands  of  the  inhabitants 
of  these  States  desire  my  advice;  and  in  compliance 
with  their  desire,  I  have  drawn  up  a  little  sketch. 


126       ORIGIN    OF    THE    METHODIST    EPISCOPAL   CHURCH. 

Lord  King's  account  of  the  Primitive  Church,  con- 
vinced me,  many  years  ago,  that  bishops  and  presbyters 
are  of  the  same  order,  and  consequently  have  the  same 
right  to  ordain.  For  many  years  I  have  been  impor- 
tuned, from  time  to  time,  to  exercise  this  right,  by 
ordaining  part  of  our  traveling  preachers.  But  I  have 
still  refused,  not  only  for  peace'  sake,  but  because  I  was 
determined  as  little  as  possible  to  violate  the  established 
order  of  the  National  Church,  to  which  I  belonged. 

But  the  case  is  widely  different  between  England  and 
North  America.  Here  there  are  bishops  who  have  a 
legal  jurisdiction.  In  America  there  are  none,  neither 
any  parish  ministers:  so  that  for  some  hundred  miles 
together  there  is  none  either  to  baptize  or  to  administer 
the  Lord's  Supper.  Here,  therefore,  my  scruples  are  at 
an  end,  and  I  conceive  myself  at  full  liberty,  as  I  violate 
no  order  and  invade  no  man's  right,  by  appointing  and 
sending  laborers  into  the  harvest. 

I  have  accordingly  appointed  Dr.  Coke  and  Mr. 
Francis  Asbury  to  be  joint  superintendents  over  our 
brethren  in  North  America,  as  also  Richard  Whatcoat 
and  Thomas  Vasey  to  act  as  elders  among  them,  by 
baptizing  and  administering  the  Lord's  Supper.  And  I 
prepared  a  liturgy  little  differing  from  that  of  the  Church 
of  England  (I  think,  the  best  constituted  national  church 
in  the  world),  which  I  advise  all  the  traveling  preachers 
to  use  on  the  Lord's  Day  in  all  the  congregations,  read- 
ing the  litany  only  on  Wednesdays  and  Fridays,  and 
praying  extempore  on  all  other  days.  I  also  advise  the 
the  elders  to  administer  the  Supper  of  the  Lord  on  every 
Lord's  Day. 

If  any  one  will  point  out  a  more  rational  and  scrip- 
tural w&y  of  feeding  and  guiding  those  poor  sheep  in 
the  wilderness,  I  will  gladly  embrace  it.  At  present  I 
can  not  see  any  better  method  than  I  have  taken. 

It  has,  indeed,  been  proposed  to  desire  the  English 
bishops  to  ordain  part  of  our  preachers  for  America; 
but  to  this  I  object:  (1)  I  desired  the  bishop  of  Lon- 
don to  ordain  only  one ;  but  could  not  prevail.  (2)  If 
they  consented,  we  know  the  slowness  of  their  proceed- 
ings; but  the  matter  admits  of  no  delay.  (3)  If  they 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  127 

would  ordain  them  now,  they  would  likewise  expect  to 
govern  them;  and  how  grievously  would  this  entangle 
us!  (4)  As  our  American  brethren  are  now  totally  dis- 
entangled, both  from  the  State  and  the  English  hie- 
rarchy, we  dare  not  entangle  them  again,  either  with  the 
one  or  the  other.  They  are  now  at  full  liberty  simply 
to  follow  the  Scriptures  and  the  Primitive  Church.  And 
we  judge  it  best  that  they  should  stand  in  that  liberty 
wherewith  God  has  so  strangely  made  them  free. 

After  the  reading  and  consideration  of  this  document, 
it  was,  without  a  single  dissenting  voice,  regularly  and 
formally  "agreed  to  form  a  Methodist  Episcopal  Church, 
in  which  the  liturgy  (as  presented  by  Rev.  John  Wes- 
ley) should  be  read,  and  the  sacraments  be  administered 
by  a  superintendent,  elders  and  deacons,  who  shall  be 
ordained  by  a  Presbytery,  using  the  Episcopal  form,  as 
prescribed  in  Rev.  Mr.  Wesley's  Prayer-book;"  or,  in 
the  language  of  the  Minutes  of  the  Conference,  "follow- 
ing the  counsel  of  Mr.  John  Wesley,  who  recommended 
the  Episcopal  mode  of  government,  we  thought  it  best 
to  become  an  Episcopal  Church,  making  the  Episcopal 
office  elective,  and  the  elected  superintendent  or  bishop 
amenable  to  the  body  of  ministers  and  preachers." 

Wesley  was  an  Episcopalian,  and  thoroughly  believed 
in  the  Episcopal  form  of  church  government.  "I  firmly 
believe,"  he  said,  "  I  am  a  scriptural  Episcopos,  as  much 
as  any  man  in  England  or  in  Europe;"  but  he  did  not 
believe  in  an  "uninterrupted  succession."  When  he 
ordained  Coke  a  "superintendent,"  he  ordained  him  a 
bishop.  He  objected  to  the  title  as  it  was  used  in  the 
English  Church,  but  did  not  object  to  the  thing  itself. 
He  was  opposed  to  the  abuse  of  the  office,  not  the  use 
of  it.  At  any  rate,  the  Episcopacy  of  the  English 
Church  was  incorporated  into  the  Methodist  Church  of 
America,  with  three  orders  of  clergy,  viz.:  bishops, 
elders  and  deacons. 


WESLEY  NOT  A  METHODIST. 


LIKE  Luther,  Zwingle,  Calvin  and  Knox,  "Wesley 
never  made  any  attempt  to  return  to  apostolic  practice, 
nor  did  either  of  these  reformers  even  suggest  the  idea 
of  reproducing  the  Church  of  Christ  as  established  hy 
the  apostles.  They  simply  aimed  to  re-form  existing 
ecclesiastical  institutions.  As  to  Wesley,  he  desired  to 
re-form  the  Church  of  England  by  vitalizing  and  spirit- 
ualizing its  priesthood,  and  by  arousing  the  activities 
of  its  membership  ;  and,  as  respected  his  work  in 
America,  as  we  have  already  seen,  it  is  very  evident 
that  he  sought,  with  the  tact  and  diplomacy  of  a  crafty 
statesman,  to  adjust  the  Church  of  England  to  the  pe- 
culiar political  condition  of  the  government  of  the 
United  States — to  a  republican  form  of  government  as 
contrasted  with  a  kingly  government.  lie  was  a  shrewd 
manager  in  politico-ecclesiastical  affairs.  He  was  a 
proficient  in  the  study  of  adaptations  of  means  to  the 
consummation  of  proposed  measures,  and  it  is  a  note- 
worthy fact  that,  up  to  this  day,  the  same  spirit  of 
diplomacy — the  same  spirit  of  accommodation  to  sur- 
rounding influences — pervades  the  entire  fabric  of  the 
Methodist  Episcopal  Church.  That  Wesley  was  Avell 
acquainted  with  .New  Testament  teaching,  and  apostolic 
practice,  is  a  fact  made  evident  in  his  Explanatory  Notes 
upon  the  New  Testament,  in  his  Doctrinal  Tracts,  and  in 
his  letters  of  instructions  to  the  churches.  Indeed,  so 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  129 

vigorously  did  he  advocate  baptism  for  remission  of  sins 
in  his  Doctrinal  Tracts,  that  a  good  deal  of  what  he  said 
upon  that  subject  has  been  expunged  in  the  latest  edi- 
tions, if  the  work  itself  has  not  been  entirely  suppressed. 
In  his  letter  "to  Dr.  Coke,  Mr.  Asbury,  and  our  breth- 
ren in  North  America,"  which  we  reproduced  in  a  pre- 
vious article, "he  "advises  the  elders  to  administer  the 
Supper  of  the  Lord  on  every  Lord's  Day"  (which  sounds 
very  apostolic),  and  leaves  them  uat  full  liberty  simply 
to  follow  the  Scriptures  and  the  Primitive  Church"  (which 
also  sounds  very  apostolic).  And  it  looks  very  apos- 
tolic when  we  quote  and  read  the  following  words  from 
the  Preface  of  his  "New  Testament  Notes:"  "Would 
to  God  that  all  the  party  names,  and  unscriptural  phrases 
and  forms,  which  have  divided  the  Christian  world,  were 
forgot;  and  that  we  might  all  sit  down  together,  as  humble, 
loving  disciples,  at  the  feet  of  our  common  Master,  to  hear 
his  word,  to  imbibe  his  spirit,  and  to  transcribe  his  life  into 
our  own." 

The  case  of  John  Wesley  is  but  another  illustration 
of  the  fact  that  a  man  may,  as  a  scholar  and  as  an  hon- 
est interpreter  of  historical  facts,  acknowledge  and  ad- 
vocate the  truth,  while  at  the  same  time  his  judgment 
is  swayed  by  ecclesiastical  associations,  and  by  a  love 
of  some  particular  form  of  theology,  or  by  self-interest, 
which  not  unfrequently  outweighs  all  considerations  for 
the  unity  and  peace  of  the  Church  of  Christ.  "When 
we  open  histories,  and  read  the  works  of  commentators, 
and  examine  the  critical  and  exegetical  authorities  of 
educated  men,  we  are  made  to  rejoice  at  the  unanimity 
with  which  they  all  speak  of  apostolic  precedent  and 
practice,  and  to  rejoice  in  the  hope  that  the  restoration 
of  apostolic  Christianity  will  soon  become  an  accom- 
plished fact;  but  when  we  take  a  survey  of  the  religious 


130  WESLEY  XOT  A  METHODIST. 

situation,  and  see  the  persistent  efforts  put  forth  by  the 
various  Protestant  denominations  to  maintain  eccle- 
siastical distinctions,  and  to  support  antagonistic  creeds, 
and  to  apologize  for  divisions,  we  utterly  despair  of 
realizing  the  unity  ot  Christians  upon  the  basis  of  the 
Bible.  Concerning  the  views  of  Wesley  on  church  gov- 
ernment, we  here  produce  one  who  is  competent  to  speak. 
Says  Dr.  Curry,  of  the  Christian  Advocate  (New  York, 
May  25, 1871): 

No  fact  respecting  the  history  of  John  "Wesley  is  more 
clearly  manifest  than  that  he  was  always  a  strenuous 
supporter  of  the  authority  of  the  Established  Church 
of  England.  He  jealously  regarded  the  exclusive  eccle- 
siastical authority  of  that  Church  in  all  that  he  did  as 
an  evangelist,  and  seemed  always  determined  that  while 
he  lived  and  ruled — and  it  was  always  understood  that 
he  would  rule  as  long  as  he  lived — nothing  should  be  tol- 
erated in  his  societies  at  all  repugnant  to  the  sole  and 
exclusive  ecclesiastical  authority  of  the  Established 
Church.  This  rule  was  applied  to  his  societies  in  Amer- 
ica before  the  Revolution  just  as  strictly  as  to  those  in 
England.  But  the  political  separation  of  America  from 
Great  Britain,  as  it  also  ended  the  authority  of  the  En- 
glish Church  in  this  country,  made  it  lawful,  according 
to  his  theor}^  of  the  case,  for  the  Methodist  societies  in 
America  to  become  regularly  organized  churches. 

The  theological  tenets  and  dogmas  of  Wesleyan 
Methodism,  with  perhaps  two  or  three  modifications, 
are  the  same  as  those  which,  by  common  consent,  are 
at  present  deemed  "evangelical"  or  "orthodox."  The 
articles  of  religion  drawn  up  by  Wesley  for  his  imme- 
diate followers,  and  substantially  adopted  by  all  Meth- 
odist bodies  since,  are  but  slightly  modified  from  those 
of  the  Established  Church  of  England.  The  sermons 
of  John  Wesley,  and  his  notes  on  the  New  Testament, 
are  recognized  by  his  followers  in  Great  Britain  and 
America  as  the  standard  of  Methodism,  and  as  the  basis 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  131 

of  their  theological  creed.  There  are,  according  to 
McClintock  and  Strong's  Encyclopedia,  about  nine  sub- 
divisions of  the  Methodist  body  in  the  old  country,  viz: 
the  "Wesley an  Methodists;  the  Calvinistic  Methodists; 
the  Wesleyan  Methodist  New  Connection;  the  Band- 
Room  Methodists;  the  Primitive  Methodists;  the  Byran- 
ites,  or  Bible  Christians;  the  Primitive  Methodists  of 
Ireland;  the  Protestant  Methodists;  the  Wesleyan  Meth- 
odist Association;  the  Reformers;  the  Wesleyan  Reform 
Union.  In  the  United  States,  we  have  the  Methodist 
Episcopal  Church;  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church, 
South;  the  Wesleyan  Methodist  Church;  the  African 
Methodist  Episcopal  Church;  the  African  Methodist 
Episcopal  (Zion)  Church  ;  the  United  Brethren  in  Christ, 
sometimes  called  German  Methodists;  the  Evangelical 
Association;  the  Free  Methodist  Church;  the  Colored 
Methodist  Church,  besides  a  few  others  of  less  signif- 
icance. According  to  the  apostle  Paul,  all  this  is  "car- 
nal," and  not  "spiritual."  "The  unity  of  the  faith"  is 
not  found  in  all  these  divisions  and  subdivisions.  The 
apostles  of  the  Lamb  never  founded  one  of  these.  They 
have  all  originated  within  a  little  over  a  hundred  years. 
As  distinct  organizations,  they  are  all  of  the  "earth. 
earthy."  They  are  all  founded  upon  the  opinions  and 
speculations  and  dreams  of  men,  and  the  mark  of  the 
beast  is  impressed  upon  them  all.  At  the  Pan-Presby- 
terian Convocation,  held  in  Glasgow,  Scotland,  in  1877, 
Dr.  Bailie  declared  that  there  were  "forty  brandies  of 
the  Presbyterian  family"  in  existence,  but  he  failed  to 
tell  that  "the  trail  of  the  Serpent  is  over  them  all/' 
In  making  these  remarks,  we  speak  not  of  good  men 
and  women,  and  of  intelligent  and  philanthropic  men 
and  women,  in  them  all;  but  we  speak  of  the  systems 
of  theology  and  of  the  distinct  ecclesiastical  organiza- 


132  WESLEY  NOT  A  METHODIST. 

tions,  which  these  bodies  represent,  as  wickedly  sectarian, 
and  as  a  burning  disgrace  to  the  Author  of  Christianity. 
None  of  these  sects  originated  under  apostolic  teach- 
ing, none  of  them  can  be  dated  beyond  the  sixteenth 
century;  and  hence,  as  misrepresenting  the  Church  of 
Christ,  which  the  apostles  founded,  we  reject  them  all. 
The  Methodist  theology  advocates  "justification  by 
faith  alone,"  and  the  preachers  of  that  distinctive  the- 
ology tell  us  that  it  is  a  doctrine  very  "full  of  comfort," 
when  at  the  same  time,  be  it  known,  that  there  is  no 
such  doctrine  in  the  word  of  God.  What  they  call  jus- 
tification by  faith  alone,  is  justification  by  sensuous 
feeling — an  ecstasy,  an  illusion,  a  dream,  a  vain  imagi- 
nation, the  delights  of  animal  magnetism — which  they 
tell  us  is  wrought  directly  by  the  mystic  impulse  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  without  illumination  and  conviction  by  the 
testimonies  of  God's  word.  The  Methodist  Church 
make  baptism  a  "non-essential"  to  salvation,  thus  di- 
rectly insulting  the  Author  of  the  Plan  of  Salvation, 
and  substituting  human  expediency  for  divine  law. 
The  Methodist  Episcopal  system  not  only  lodges  legis- 
lative authority  in  a  bench  of  Bishops — in  a  General 
Conference — where  they  make  and  unmake  rules  and 
regulations  to  suit  the  varying  conditions  of  the  cap- 
tious and  exacting  world,  and  where  they  devise  how 
to  catch  the  tide  of  good  fortune  and  ride  out  upon  the 
wave  of  popular  applause,  but  imitating  the  example 
of  Romanism,  it  transgresses  the  laws  of  God,  changes 
the  ordinance,  and  breaks  the  everlasting  covenant. 
(Isaiah  xxiv.  5.)  The  Episcopal  system,  wherever 
found,  whether  in  the  Roman  Catholic.  Missal,  the 
Augsburg  Confession  of  Faith,  the  Heidelberg  Confes 
sion  of  Faith,  the  "Westminster  Confession,  or  in  the 
Book  of  Prayer,  or  in  the  Methodist  Discipline,  recog- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  133 

nizes  infant  church-membership  as  the  corner-stone  of 
every  pedobaptist  edifice.  And,  setting  aside  immer- 
sion, as  practiced  by  the  apostles,  and  which  by  the 
whole  world  of  learning  has  been  conceded  to  have 
been  the  exclusive  practice  of  the  Primitive  Church, 
these  innovators  upon  God's  Plan  of  Salvation  have 
substituted  rantism  and  affusion]  and  they  have  the 
effrontery  to  tell  the  sinful  world  that  sprinkling  and 
pouring  serve  the'  same  purpose  as  immersion,  if  "only 
the  heart  is  right" — as  if  wicked  men  could  have  a 
heart  right  in  the  sight  of  God  while  rejecting  the  posi- 
tive commands  of  the  Sou  of  God!  And  where  did  the 
"Mourning  Bench"  system  of  regeneration  come  from? 
Why,  it  is  hardly  fifty  years  of  age.  President  Finney, 
of  Oberlin.  College,  in  his  book  on  "Revivals,"  issued 
within  the  last  thirty  years,  was  the  first  man  who  had 
the  courage  to  proclaim  from  the  house-tops  that  the 
"mourning  bench"  was  intended  to  take  the  place  of 
baptism!  Viewed  from  the  angle  of  apostolic  teaching, 
we  surely  find  no  reformation  in  all  this;  on  the  other 
hand,  we  only  see  de-formation.  We  find  that  the 
Methodist  Discipline  is  but  a  modification  of  the  Epis- 
copal Book  of  Prayer,  and  that  the  Book  of  Prayer  is 
only  a  modification  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Missal, 
which  had  its  origin  in  the  latter  part  of  the  fifth  cen- 
tury. All  these  creed-formularies  are  but  the  product 
of  the  Dark  Ages. 

The  Episcopalian  form  of  church  government,  whether 
found  in  the  Romish  Church,  or  in  the  Church  of  En- 
gland, or  in  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  or,  if  you 
please,  in  the  Mormon  Church,  is  to  all  intents  and 
purposes  a  spiritual  despotism,  possessing  not  the  least 
semblance  to  the  apostolic  order  of  things.  Luther  at- 
tempted to  reform  the  Romish  Church  by  striking  at 


134  WESLEY  NOT  A  METHODIST. 

the  rottenness  of  the  Romish  priesthood,  and  failed; 
Zwingle  also  failed  in  the  same  direction;  Calvin  at- 
tempted to  reform  the  Romish  Church  by  denouncing 
the  false  theological  dogmas  of  that  Church,  and  failed; 
Knox,  by  herculean  blows,  undertook  to  reform  the 
despotic  government  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  and 
failed;  Henry  VIII.  made  a  compromise  between  Rom- 
anism and  Protestantism,  and  produced  the  Established 
Church  of  England;  Wesley  essayed  to  reform  the 
Church  of  England,  and  produced — the  Methodist 
Episcopal 'Church!  It  is  utterly  impossible  to  identify 
any  of  the  so-called  Protestant  Churches  with  the 
Church  of  Christ  as  established  by  his  apostles.  Every 
one  of  them  is  defective,  either  in  doctrine  or  in  gov- 
ernment; and,  being  defective  in  some  part,  and  there- 
fore antagonistic  to  the  authority  of  Jesus  Christ,  we 
accept  neither  the  one  nor  the  other.  Remove  the 
Pope  from  the  Romish  Church,  and  the  system  falls  to 
pieces,  because  the  Papacy  is  the  center  of  unity  in  that 
body.  Remove  Episcopacy  from  the  Church  of  En- 
gland, and  that  Church  falls  to  pieces,  because  Episco- 
pacy is  its  center  of  unity.  Remove  Episcopacy  from 
the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church,  and  that  ecclesiastical 
edifice  falls  into  detached  fragments,  because  the  power 
which  is  lodged  in  the  Twelve  Bishops,  and  which 
power  is  exerted  through  the  General  Conference, 
denotes  the  center"  of  unity  in  that  body.  What  we 
propose,  is  unity  in  Jesus  Christ,  the  Head  of  the 
Church — the  Head  of  the  One  Body.  And  this  unity 
never  can  be  effected,  if  we  must  carry  with  us  the 
trumpery  of  creeds  and  confessions,  the  ecclesiastical 
lumber  of  the  Dark  Ages,  the  dogmas  and  traditions 
and  speculations  of  fallible  men.  We  must  unload  all 
these,  and  dump  them  into  the  mystic  stream  of 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  135 

Babylon,  ana  let  them  forever  disappear  beneath  the 
waves  of  dark  oblivion.  The  sects  of  Christendom  are 
all  adrift  because  they  do  not  make  Christ  the  center  of 
unity — because  they  do  not  "keep  the  unity  of  the 
Spirit  in  the  bond  of  peace,"  and  because  they  do  not 
strive  to  bring  all  men  "into  the  unity  of  the  faith,  and 
of  the  knowledge  of  the  Son  of  God,  unto  a,  perfect  man, 
to  the  measure  of  the  stature  of  the  fullness  of  Christ:" 
which  all  lovers  of  the  truth  should  do,  "  that  we 
henceforth  be  no  more  children,  tossed  to  and  fro,  and 
carried  about  by  every  wind  of  doctrine,  by  the  slight 
of  men,  and  cunning  craftiness,  whereby  they  lie  in 
wait  to  deceive;  but  speaking  the  truth  in  love,  may 
grow  up  into  him  in  all  things,  which  is  the  Head,  even 
Christ:  from  whom  the  whole  body,  fitly  joined  to- 
gether, and  compacted  by  the  service  of  every  joint 
[Macknight],  according  to  its  energy,  in  the  proportion 
of  each  particular  part,  effects  the  increase  of  the  body, 
for  the  edification  of  itself  in  love."  (Eph.  iv.) 


THE  REFORMATION  OF  THE  NINETEENTH 
CENTURY. 


THOMAS  CAMPBELL  came  from  Scotland  to  the  United 
States  in  May,  1807,  and  his  son  Alexander  lauded  in 
New  York,  September  9,  1809.  They  both  settled  in 
Washington  County,  Pa.  When  Thomas  Campbell 
lauded  in  Philadelphia,  he  found  the  Seceder  Synod  in 
session,  and,  upon  presenting  his  credentials,  he  was 
cordially  received,  and  at  once  assigned  by  this  Synod 
to  the  Presbytery  of  Chartiers  in  Western  Pennsylvania. 
"Both  father  and  son  were  educated  from  childhood  in 
the  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith. 

When  the  Campbells  landed  on  the  shores  of  Amer- 
ica, they  found  the  various  denominations  in  a  deplor- 
able condition,  and  the  Presbyterian  "branches"  were, 
if  anything,  more  powerless,  as  spiritual  agencies,  than 
any  other  "branch  of  the  Church."  All  around,  as  they 
viewed  the  religious  horizon,  and  as  they  gazed  upon 
broken  ranks  of  fiery  zealots,  they  saw  nothing  but  dis- 
sension and  disunion.  Bigotry,  party  intolerance,  and 
sectarian  selfishness,  were  everywhere  phenomenal  of 
divided  churches,  and  of  distracted  members.  Infidelity 
— gross  infidelity — was  fattening  and  waxing  wanton  on 
the  spoils  of  an  inglorious  conquest.  The  aspect  of  re- 
ligious affairs  was  dark  and  gloomy  in  the  extreme. 
The  great  soul  of  Thomas  Campbell  was  moved  within 
him  when  he  saw  that  the  Avhole  land  was  given  over  to 

(136) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  137 

the  idolatrous  worship  of  opinions,  speculative  theology, 
scholastic  dogmas  and  men-made  creeds,  and  to  visions 
and  dreams,  and  to  mysticism  and  dreary  superstition. 
He  saw  that  where  there  is  "110  vision" — no  divine  rev- 
elation— the  "people  perish,"  for  want  of  spiritual  food. 
In  the  fearfully  distracted  condition  of  things,  lie  saw 
the  immediate  necessity  of  providing  an  antidote,  and 
that  antidote  was  to  be  found  in  pleading  for  Christian 
union,  in  making  an  effort  to  remove  all 'barriers,  and 
in  a  determination  to  unite  all  hearts,  if  possible,  upon 
the  Word  of  God,  as  the  only  solvent  of  an  intolerable 
evil.  While  yet  in  Scotland,  the  Campbells,  and  espe- 
cially Thomas  (for  Alexander  wras  not  yet  out  of  his 
teens),  were  impressed  with  the  necessity  and  desirability 
of  discussing  Christian  union  by  an  appeal  to  the  Word 
of  God,  and  this  necessity  and  desirability  was  impress- 
ed upon  his  mind  by  the  "Haldanean  reformation"  in 
that  country — inaugurated  by  Robert  and  J.  A.  Ilaldane 
— and  by  reading  the  discussions  of  such  eminent  In- 
dependents as  Archibald  McLean,  Alexander  Carson, 
William  Jones,  David  Dale  and  Greville  Ewing.  Simul- 
taneous with  the  movement  of  the  Campbells  in  Wash- 
ington County,  Pa.,  there  was  a  similar  movement  in 
Kentucky,  led  by  a  man  of  pronounced  abilities,  Barton 
W.  Stone,  whose  movement  for  reform  was  subsequent- 
ly absorbed  in  the  stronger  movement  of  the  Campbells. 
Thomas  Campbell  was  witness  to  the  severe  contest, 
in  the  old  country,  between  Presbyterianism  and  Prelacy, 
and  was  conversant  with  the  history  of  the  Covenanters, 
Seceders,  Relief  Church,  Burghers,  Anti-Burghers,  Old 
and  ]STew  Light  Burghers  and  Anti-Burghers — all  of 
which  parties,  in  the  right  of  private  judgment  and  per- 
sonal liberty,  were  trying  to  extricate  themselves  from 
the  thralldom  of  Romanism,  and  from  the  clutches  of  a 
12 


138  REFORMATION  OF  THE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY. 

proud  and  imperious  Prelacy.  There  was  a  pandemo- 
nium of  sectism  at  the  time  the  Campbells  attempted  a 
reformation  of  the  Seceder  Church,  in  the  Presbytery 
of  Chartiers;  the  Bible  was  a  dead  letter  and  inoperative 
among  the  people;  the  consciences  of  church  commu- 
nicants were  fettered  with  Creeds  and  Confessions  of 
Faith;  the  masses  were  ignorant  of  the  Word  of  God; 
the  clergy  seemed  to  be  absolutely  ignorant  of  the  rules 
of  Bible  interpretation;  the  various  sects  were  quarrel- 
ing and  fighting  over  party  shibboleths ,  and  ungodly 
rivalry  existed  among  the  Protestant  denominations; 
a  line  of  distinction  was  clearly  marked  between  the 
"clergy  and  the  laity;"  the  denominations  were  all  lost 
to  the  apostolic  order  of  things. 

The  Seceder  congregations  in  Washington  County 
were  much  pleased  with  the  accession  of  Thomas  Camp- 
bell to  their  ministry,  to  whom  they  became  strongly  at- 
tached. His  high  order  of  talents  rendered  him  very  pop- 
ular among  the  people.  Soon,  however,  suspicions  began 
to  arise  in  the  minds  of  his  ministerial  brethren  that  he 
was  too  much  disposed  to  relax  the  rigidness  of  their  ec- 
clesiastical rules,  and  to  cherish  for  sister  denominations 
feelings  of  good  will  and  fraternity  in  which  they  were 
unwilling  to  share.  They  watched  his  movements  with 
jaundiced  eyes,  and  avoided  him  with  ill  concealed  feel- 
ings of  envy,  because  he  went  among  the  destitute,  who 
had  for  a  long  time  been  deprived  of  the  ministrations  of 
the  gospel,  and  administered  the  Lord's  Supper  to  other 
branches  of  the  Presbyterian  family.  Mr.  Wilson,  a 
young  minister,  at  the  first  meeting  of  the  Presbytery, 
laid  the  case  before  it  in  the  usual  form  of  "libel," 
containing  various  formal  and  specified  charges,  the 
chief  of  which  were  that  Mr.  Campbell  had  failed  to 
inculcate  strict  adherence  to  the  church  standard  and 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  139 

usages,  and  that  he  had  even  expressed  his  disapproval 
of  some  things  contained  in  said  standard.  Placed 
upon  the  defensive,  he  was  somewhat  guarded  and  con- 
ciliatory in  his  replies.  His  pleadings  in  behalf  of 
Christian  liberty  and  common  fraternity  were  in  vain, 
and  his  appeals  to  the  Bible  were  wholly  disregarded; 
and  though  he  persisted  that  he  had  violated  no  precept 
of  the  Sacred  Volume,  the  Presbytery  finally  found  him 
deserving  of  censure  for  not  adhering  to  the  "Secession 
Testimony."  Against  this  decision  Thomas  Campbell 
protested,  and  his  case  was,  not  long  afterward,  sub- 
mitted to  the*first  meeting  of  the  Synod.  In  the  mean- 
time, he  was  apprised  of  the  fact  that  many  of  his  fellow- 
ministers  had  become  inimical  to  him  through  the  influ- 
ence of  those  who  conducted  the  prosecution ;  and 
knowing  well  that  it  was  impossible  for  him,  with  his 
views  of  the  Bible,  and  of  the  right  of  private  judg- 
ment, he  cle'arly  perceived  that  if  the  Synod  should 
sanction  the  decision  of  the  Presbytery,  he  must  at  once 
cease  to  be  a  minister  in  the  Seceder  branch  of  the  Pres- 
byterian family.  Anxious  to  avoid  a  collision  which 
might  prove  detrimental  to  his  usefulness,  and  which 
might  excite  discord  and  alienation,  and  still  cherishing 
the  desire  to  co-operate  with  those  with  whom  he  had 
been  so  long  associated,  he  addressed  an  earnest  appeal 
to  the  Synod,  which  was  to  be  presented  to  that  august 
body  at  its  first  meeting.  The  appeal  was  addressed, 
"To  the  Associate  Synod  of  Xorth  America."  That 
the  reader  may  judge  of  the  animus  of  this  '-appeal," 
and  get  an  idea  of  the  incipient  stages  of  the  great 
reformatory  movement,  which,  in  the  course  of  time, 
was  destined  to  shake  the  whole  religious  world,  we 
make  the  following  extract : 

Is  it,  therefore,  because  I  plead  the  cause  of  scriptural 


140  REFORMATION  OF  THE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY. 

and  apostolic  worship  of  the  Church,  in  opposition  to 
the  various  errors  and  schisms  which  have  so  awfully 
corrupted  and  divided  it,  that  the  brethren  of  the  Union 
should  feel  it  difficult  to  admit  me  as  their  fellow-laborer 
in  that  blessed  work?  I  sincerely  rejoice  with  them  in 
what  they  have  done  in  that  way;  but  still,  all  is  not 
yet  done;  and  surely  they  can  have  no  objections  to  go 
further.  Nor  do  I  presume  to  dictate  to  them  or  to 
others  as  to  how  they  should  proceed  for  the  glorious 
purpose  of  promoting  the  unity  and  purity  of  the 
Church;  but  only  beg  leave,  for  my  own  part,  to  walk 
upon  such  pure  and  peaceable  ground  that  I  may  have 
nothing  to  do  with  human  controversy,  about  the  right 
or  wrong  side  of  any  opinion  whatsoever,  by  simply 
acquiescing  in  what  is  written,  as  quite 'sufficient  for 
every  purpose  of  faith  and  duty;  and  thereby  to  influ- 
ence as  many  as  possible  to  depart  from  human  contro- 
versy, to  betake  themselves  to  the  Scriptures,  and,  in  so 
doing,  to  the  study  and  practice  of  faith,  holiness  and 
love.  And  all  this  without  any  intention  on  my  part 
to  judge  or  despise  my  Christian  brethren  who  may  not 
see  with  my  eyes  in  those  things  which,  to  me,  appear 
indispensably  necessary  to  promote  and  secure  the  unity, 
peace  and  purity  of  the  Church.  Say,  brethren,  what 
is  my  offense,  that  I  should  be  thrust  out  from  the  her- 
itage of  the  Lord,  or  from  serving  him  in  that  good 
work  to  which  he  has  been  graciously  pleased  to  call 
me?  For  what  error  or  immorality  ought  I  to  be  reject- 
ed, except  it  be  that  I  refuse  to  acknowledge  as  obliga- 
tory upon  myself,  or  to  impose  upon  others,  anything 
as  of  Divine  obligation  for  which  I  can  not  produce  a 
11  Thus  saith  the  Lord?"  This,  I  am  sure,  I  can  do,  while 
I  keep  by  his  own  word;  but  not  quite  so  sure  when  I 
substitute  my  own  meaning  or  opinion,  or  that  of  others, 
instead  thereof. 

In  the  same  "appeal,"  he  says:  "And  I  hope  it  is 
no  presumption  to  believe  that  saying  and  doing  the 
very  same  things  that  are  said  and  done  before  our  eyes 
on  the  sacred  page,  is  infallibly  right,  as  well  as  all- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  141 

sufficient  for  the  edification  of  the  Church,  whose  duty 
and  perfection  is  to  be  in  all  things  conformed  to  the 
original  standard."  After  the  reading  of  this  protest, 
aud  the  hearing  of  the  case  before  the  Synod,  it  was 
decided  that  "there  were  such  informalities  in  the  pro- 
ceedings of  the  Presbytery  in  the  trial  of  the  case  as  to 
afford  sufficient  reason  to  the  Synod  to  set  aside  their 
judgment  and  decision,  and  to  release  the  protester 
from  the  censure  inflicted  by  the  Presbytery" — which 
they  accordingly  did.  After  this,  the  charges  which 
had  been. before  the  Presbytery,  with  all  the  papers 
pertaining  to  the  trial,  were  referred  to  a  committee, 
who  finally  reported  as  follows: 

"Upon  the  whole,  the  committee  are  of  opinion  that 
Mr.  Campbell's  answers  to  the  two  first  articles  of 
charge  are  so  evasive  and  unsatisfactory,  and  highly 
equivocal  upon  great  and  important  articles  of  revealed 
religion,  as  to  give  ground  to  conclude  that  he  has  ex- 
pressed sentiments  very  different  upon  these  articles, 
and  from  the  sentiments  held  and  professed  by  this 
Church,  and  are  sufficient  grounds  to  infer  censure." 

"From  this  extreme  reluctance  to  separate  from  the 
Seceders,  for  many  of  whom,  both  preachers  and  people, 
he  continued  to  cherish  sentiments  of  Christian  regard, 
Mr.  Campbell  was  induced  to  submit  to  this  decision, 
handing  in  at  the  same  time  a  declaration  '  that  his  sub- 
mission should  be  understood  to  mean  no  more,  on  his 
part,  than  an  act  of  deference  to  the  judgment  of  the 
court,  that,  by  so  doing,  he  might  not  give  offense  to 
his  brethren  by  manifesting  a  refractory  spirit.'  After 
this  concession,  Mr.  Campbell  fondly  hoped  that  the 
amicable  relations  formerly  existing  between  him  and 
the  Presbytery  of  Chartiers  would  be  restored,  and  that 
he  would  be  permitted  to  prosecute  his  labors  in  peace. 
In  this,  however,  he  soon  found  himself  mistaken,  and 


142  REFORMATION  OF  THE  NINETEENTH  CENTURY. 

discovered,  with  much  regret,  that  the  hostility  of  his 
opponents  had  been  only  intensified  by  the  issue  of  the 
trial,  and  was  more  undisguised  than  ever.  Misrepre- 
sentations and  calumny  were  employed  to  detract  from 
his  influence;  a  constant  watch  was  placed  over  his 
proceedings,  and  he  discovered  that  even  spies  were 
employed  to  attend  his  meetings,  in  order,  if  possible, 
to  obtain  fresh  grounds  of  accusation  against  him." 
(Memoirs  of  A.  Campbell,  Vol.  I.  pp.  229-30). 

Forbearance,  under  such  circumstances,  finally  ceased 
to  be  a  Christian  virtue,  and,  having  a  thousand  times 
more  reverence  for  the  word  of  God  than  for*  the  selfish 
sectarian  decrees  of  Synods  and  Presbyteries,  his  self- 
respect  compelled  him  to  secede  from  the  Seceders,  and 
accordingly  he  presented  to  the  Synod  a  formal  renun- 
ciation of  its  authority,  announcing  that  he  now 
abandoned  "all  ministerial  connection"  with  it,  and 
would  hold  himself  thenceforth  "  utterly  unaffected  by 
its  decisions."  His  withdrawal  from  the  persecuting 
Seceders  produced  no  interruption  in  his  ministerial 
labors.  Continuing  to  advocate  toleration  of  private 
judgment  and  Christian  union  upon  the  basis  of  the 
Bible,  the  people  in  large  numbers  continued  to  follow 
him  up,  and  to  eagerly  listen  to  his  powerful  pleas, 
wherever  it  was  in  his  power  to  hold  meetings — in 
school-houses,  in  maple  groves,  or  in  private  houses. 
In  view  of  the  unsettled  condition  of  religious  affairs, 
and  with  a  sincere  desire  to  form  a  union  upon  the 
Bible  alone,  he  proposed  to  the  honest  and  conscien- 
tious persons  of  the  Presbyterian  congregations  that  a 
special  meeting  should  be  held  in  order  to  an  inter- 
change of  sentiments  upon  the  existing  state  of  things, 
nml  to  give,  if  possible,  more  distinctness  to  the 
movement  in  which  they  had  thus  far  been  co  operating 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  143 

without  any  determinate  arrangement.  Up  to  this 
time,  no  separation  from  the  religious  denominations 
had  been  contemplated — no  separate  bond  of  union  had 
been  suggested;  nor  was  there  the  remotest  allusion  to 
the  formation  of  a  new  religious  party.  On  the  con- 
trary, Thomas  Campbell  only  desired  to  abolish  sectism, 
and  he  labored  to  induce  the  different  religious  denomi- 
nations to  unite  upon  the  Bible  as  the  only  authorized 
rule  of  faith  and  practice.  His  heart  sickened  at  the 
sight  of  party  ism,  and  he  urged,  with  all  the  energy  of 
his  great  intellect,  that  all  religious  parties  should  desist 
from  shameful  controversies  about  matters  of  mere 
opinion  and  expediency.  Having  separated  himself 
from  the  Seceder  branch,  Mr.  Campbell  was  soon  sur- 
rounded by  a  large  number  of  godly  and  intelligent 
persons,  who,  like  himself,  were  disheartened  with  the 
evils  growing  out  of  sectarian  envy  and  rivalry,  and 
who  were  \villing  to  unite  with  him  in  an  effort  to 
make  the  word  of  God  the  final  appeal. 


ATTEMPTS  AT  REFORMATION. 


IN  our  last  article  we  made  reference  to  a  meeting 
called  by  Thomas  Campbell,  the  specific  object  of 
which  was  to  determine  the  course  to  be  pursued  by 
those  who  had  separated  themselves  from  the  trammels 
of  ccclesiasticism  and  from  the  domination  of  a  perse- 
cuting Presbyterian  priesthood,  and  from  the  delibera- 
tions of  which  meeting  we  date  the  origin  of  the  plea 
for  a  return  to  apostolic  teaching  and  practice.  It  is 
our  purpose  to  acquaint  our  readers  with  the  facts 
which  gave  rise  to  the  reformatory  movement  of  the 
nineteenth  century,  and  to  furnish  the  reasons  of  separa- 
tion from  all  the  ecclesiastical  establishments  of  modern 
times.  We  have  already  traced  out  the  origin  of  the 
Protestant  sects,  the  origin  of  Protestant  creedism,  and 
have  connectedly  shown  how  one  sect  has  grown  out  of 
another  sect,  and  how  one  creed  has  succeeded  another 
creed.  When  Thomas  Campbell  began  his  reformation, 
or  when  he  first  made  his  attempt  to  reform  the  Seceder 
Church,  in  which  he  held  membership,  he  found  the 
religious  world  in  universal  chaos.  He  sa\y  no  way  out 
of  this  chaos,  and  discovered  no  basis  of  Christian 
union,  except  in  the  abandonment  of  all  creedism,  and 
in  a  complete  restoration  of  the  apostolic  order  of 
things. 

The  time  for  solemn  consultation  had  arrived.  There 
was  a  large  assembly  of  interested  people,  all  of  whom 
seemed  to  feel  the  importance  of  the  occasion,  and  to 

(144) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  145 

realize  the  responsibilities  of  their  new  religious  atti- 
tude. A  deep  feeling  of  solemnity  pervaded  the 
assembly.  The  divine  guidance  was  invoked,  every 
heart  seemed  to  be  filled  with  prayerful  solicitude,  and 
all  seemed  to  seek  for  that  wisdom  which  comes  from 
above.  Thomas  Campbell  rehearsed  the  great  question 
from  the  beginning.  "With  unusual  force  he  deplored 
the  shameful  existence  of  religious  divisions,  and  mourned 
the  desolations  of  Zion,  and  deprecated  the  ungodly  ri- 
valries of  fighting  sects.  He  called  attention  to  the 
word  of  God  as  the  infallible  standard  of  spiritual 
truth,  and  as  an  all-sufficient  guide  in  the  Christian  life, 
and  as  furnishing  the  only  basis  of  Christian  union  r.nd 
co-operation.  He  alluded  to  the  departures  that  had 
been  taken  from  the  Sacred  Volume,  and  how  evil- 
minded  men  had  substituted  theories,  speculations,  opin- 
ions and  human  dogmas  for  the  simplicity  of  the  gospel 
of  Christ,  and  how  the  Bible  was  set  aside  to  make 
room  for  philosophical  abstractions,  and  for  all  sorts  of 
fancies  and  conceits.  As  the  only  means  of  removing 
all  these  evils,  he  insisted  with  great  earnestness  upon  a 
radical  return  to  the  simple  teachings  of  the  holy 
Scriptures,  and  for  an  entire  rejection  of  everything  in 
the  Christian  world  for  which  there  could  not  be  pro- 
duced a  Divine  warrant.  Finally,  after  thoroughly 
reviewing  the  premises  which  he  and  his  friends  occu- 
pied in  the  proposed  reformation,  he  proceeded  to 
announce,  in  the  most  simple  and  emphatic  terms,  the 
great  regulating  principle  or  rule  which  was  intended 
to  be  the  accepted  guide  of  their  future  actions.  "  That 
rule,  my  highly  respected  hearers,"  said  he  in  conclu- 
sion, "is  this,  that  WHERE  THE  SCRIPTURES  SPEAK,  WE 

SPEAK ;  AND  WHER-E  THE  SCRIPTURES  ARE  SILENT,  AVE  ARE 
SILENT." 

13 


146  ATTEMPTS  AT  REFORMATION. 

Upon  the  enunciation  of  this  supreme  rule  of  action, 
a  solemn  silence  pervaded  the  assembly,  and  thrilled 
with  strange  emotions  every  heart.  They  saw  at  a 
glance  the  vexatious  problem  solved,  and  in  a  manner 
so  simple  and  rudimental,  that  it  appeared  to  them  like 
a  new  revelation.  Here,  no\v,  at  length,  was  an  end  put 
to  all  their  doubts.  The  path  of  duty  was  now  made 
clear.  Here  was  the  solvent  of  all  religious  strife.  En- 
couragement seized  every  heart,  and  joy  lighted  up  every 
eye,  because,  from  henceforth,  they  were  to  take  God 
at  his  word,  and  from  this  time  forth  they  were  to  rely 
exclusively  upon  apostolic  precept  and  example.  All 
religious  teaching,  which  consisted  in  remote  inferences, 
fanciful  interpretations,  speculative  theories,  and  in  false 
rules  of  interpretation,  was  forever  to  be  discarded — a 
consummation  never  attempted  either  by  Luther,  Zwing- 
le,  Calvin,  Wesley,  or  by  any  other  Protestant  reformer. 
"Whatever  private  opinions  men  might  entertain  in  re- 
gard to  matters  not  clearly  revealed,  must  be  reserved 
as  private  property,  and  must  not  be  imposed  on  any 
one  as  a  test  of  loyalty  and  Christian  fraternity.  The 
silence  of  the  Bible  must  be  respected  equally  with  its 
positive  and  unquestioned  revelations,  which,  by  divine 
authority,  were  declared  to  be  able  to  "make  the  man 
of  God  perfect,  and  thoroughly  furnished  unto  every 
good  work." 

After  Mr.  Campbell  finished  his  remarkable  address, 
he  called  upon  those  present  for  a  free  and  candid  ex- 
pression of  their  views.  After  an  interval  of  some  con- 
siderable time,  the  dead  silence  was  broken  by  a  shrewd 
Scotch  Seceder,  Andrew  Munro,  a  bookseller  and  post- 
master at  Canonsburg,  who  arose  and  said  :  "  Mr.  Camp- 
bell, if  we  adopt  that  as  a  basis,  then  there  is  an  end  of 
infant  baptism."  This  remark  produced  a  profound 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  147 

sensation.  "Of  course,"  remarked  Mr.  Campbell,  "if 
infant  baptism  be  not  found  in  Scripture,  we  can  have 
nothing  to  do  with  it."  Upon  this,  Thomas  Acheson, 
of  Washington,  arose,  greatly  excited,  and,  advancing 
a  short  distance,  exclaimed,  laying  his  hand  upon  his 
heart:  "I  hope  I  may  never  see  the  day  when  my  heart 
will  renounce  that  blessed  saying  of  the  Scripture,  'Suf- 
fer little  children  to  come  unto  me,  and  forbid  them  not; 
for  of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven.'  "  Upon  saying 
this  he  was  so  much  affected  that  he  burst  into  tears, 
and  while  a  deep  sympathetic  feeling  pervaded  the  en- 
tire assembly,  he  was  about  to  retire  to  an  adjoining 
room,  when  James  Foster,  not  willing  that  this  misap- 
plication of  Scripture  should  pass  unchallenged,  cried 
out:  "Mr.  Acheson,  I  would  remark  that  in  the  portion 
of  Scripture  you  have  quoted,  there  is  no  reference  what- 
ever to  infant  baptism.'"1  Without  offering  a  reply,  Mr. 
Acheson  passed  out  to  weep  alone;  "but  this  incident," 
says  Prof.  Richardson,  in  his  Memoirs  of  A.  Campldl, 
"while  it  foreshadowed  some  of  the  trials  which  the 
future  had  in  store,  failed  to  abate,  in  the  least,  the  con- 
fidence which  the  majority  of  those  present  placed  in 
the  principles  to  which  they  were  committed.  The  rule, 
which  Mr.  Campbell  had  announced,  seemed  to  cover 
the  whole  ground,  and  to  be  so  obviously  just  and 
proper,  that  after  further  discussion  and  conference,  it 
was  adopted  with  apparent  unanimity,  no  valid  objec- 
tions being  urged  against  it." 


THE  WOBD  OF  GOD  THE  SOLE  RULE  OF 
ACTIOK. 


THE  rule  of  action  adopted  in  that  humble  and  ob- 
scure meeting  was  destined  to  revolutionize  the  religious 
•world.  "Where  the  Scriptures  speak,  we  speak;  where 
these  are  silent,  we  are  silent"  is  a  sentiment  that  not 
only  reaches  back  to  the  days  of  the  apostles,  but  one 
which  reaches  into  the  far  future  with  consequences  of 
good  to  the  world  that  are  beyond  all  human  estimate. 
For  the  purpose  of  promoting  Christian  union  and  pro- 
ducing peace  in  the  religious  world,  and  in  order  to 
carry  out  this  purpose  more  effectively,  it  was  resolved, 
at  a  meeting  held  on  the  headwaters  of  Buffalo  Creek, 
August  17,  1809,  that  this  little  party  of  reformers 
would  form  themselves  into  a  regular  association,  to  be 
known  as  "The  Christian  Association  of  Washington." 
They  then  appointed  twenty-one  of  their  number  to 
meet  and  confer  together,  and,  with  the  counsel  of 
Thomas  Campbell,  to  determine  the  proper  method  by 
which  to  consummate  the  object  of  the  Association. 
Mr.  Campbell  prepared  his  Declaration  and  Address, 
the  object  of  which  was  not  to  formulate  a  new  creed, 
but  to  set  forth  in  a  perspicuous  and  forcible  manner 
the  object  of  the  movement  in  which  he  and  those  asso- 
ciated with  him  were  enlisted.  At  a  called  and  special 
meeting,  he  read  the  document  in  the  presence  of  his 
brethren,  that  it  might  be  approved  and  adopted  by 

(148) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  149 

them.  Having  been  unanimously  adopted  as  an  expo- 
nent of  their  pronounced  principles,  it  was  at  once  or- 
dered to  be  printed,  which  was  done  September  7,  1809. 
We  quote  as  follows  from  this  "Declaration;"  of  the 
far  reaching  consequences  of  the  principles  which  the 
document  contained,  neither  Thomas  Campbell  nor  his 
associates  had  a  full  conception : 

"Our  desire,  therefore,  for  ourselves  and  our  brethren 
would  be,  that,  rejecting  human  opinions  and  the  inven- 
tions of  men,  as  of  any  authority,  or  as  having  any 
place  in  the  Church  of  God,  we  might  forever  cease 
from  further  contentions  about  such  things,  returning 
to  and  holding  fast  by  the  original  standard,  taking  the 
Divine  Word  alone  for  our  rule,  the  Holy  Spirit  for  our 
teacher  and  guide  to  lead  us  into  all  truth,  and  Christ 
alone  as  exhibited  in  the  Word  for  our  salvation ;  and 
that  by  so  doing  we  may  be  at  peace  among  ourselves, 
follow  peace  with  all  men,  and  holiness,  without  which 
no  man  shall  see  the  Lord.  Impressed  with  these  sen- 
timents, we  have  resolved  as  follows:" 

I.  That  we  form  ourselves  into  a  religious  association, 
under  the  denomination  of  the  Christian  Association  of 
Washington,  for  the  sole  purpose  of  promoting  simple, 
evangelical  Christianity,  free  from  all  mixture  of  human 
opinions  and  inventions  of  men. 

II.  That  each  member,  according  to  his  ability,  cheer- 
fully and  liberally  subscribe  a  specified  sum,  to  be  paid 
half-yearly,  for  the  purpose  of  raising  a  fund  to  support 
a  pure  gospel  ministry,  that  shall  reduce  to  practice  that 
whole  form  of  doctrine,  worship,  discipline  and  govern- 
ment expressly  revealed  and  enjoined  in  the  Word  of 
God;    and  also  for  supplying  the  poor  with  the  Holy 
Scriptures. 

III.  That  this  society  consider  it  a  duty,   and  shall 
use  all  proper  means  within  its  power,  to  encourage  the 
formation   of  similar  associations;    and   shall,   for   this 
purpose,  hold  itself  in  readiness,  upon  application,  to 


150  THE  WORD  OF  GOD  THE  SOLE  RULE  OF  ACTION. 

correspond  with  and  render  all  possible  assistance  to 
such  as  may  desire  to  associate  for  the  same  desirable 
and  important  purposes. 

IV.  That  this  society  by  no  means  considers  itself  a 
Church,  nor  does  at  all  assume  to  itself  the  powers  pe- 
culiar to  such  a  society;  nor  do  the  members,  as  such, 
consider  themselves  as  standing  connected  "in  that  rela- 
tion ;  nor  as  at  all  associated  for  the  peculiar  purposes 
of  Church  association,  but  merely  as  voluntary  advo- 
cates for  Church    reformation,    and  as  possessing   the 
powers  common  to  all  individuals  who  may  please  to 
associate,  in  a  peaceful  and  orderly  manner,  for  any  law- 
ful purpose — namely,  the  disposal  of  their  time,  counsel 
and  property,  as  they  may  see  cause. 

V.  That  this  society,  formed  for  the  sole  purpose  of 
promoting  simple,  evangelical  Christianity,  shall  to  the 
utmost  of  its  power,  countenance  and  support  such  min- 
isters, and  such  only,  as  exhibit  a  manifest  conformity 
to  the  original  standard,  in  conversation  and  doctrine,  in 
zeal  and  diligence;  only  such  as  reduce  to  practice  that 
simple,  original  form  of  Christianity  expressly  exhibited 
upon  the  sacred  page,  without  attempting  to  inculcate 
anything  of  human    authority,   of   private   opinion,,  or 
inventions  of  men,  as  having  place  in  the  constitution, 
faith  or  worship  of  the  Christian  Church,  or  anything 
as  matter  of  Christian  faith  or  duty,  for  which  there 
can  not  be  expressly  produced  a  "Thus  saith  the  Lord!" 
either  in  express  terms  or  by  approved  precedent. 

By  the  wording  of  the  foregoing  statement  of  prin- 
ciples, it  will  be  seen  that  the  Association  did  not  at  all 
regard  itself  as  a  Church,  or  publish  these  statements  as 
the  articles  of  a  creed,  but  simply  to  publish  to  the  world 
their  desire  to  urge  "a  pure  evangelical  reformation,  by 
the  simple  preaching  of  the  gospel,  and  the  administra- 
tion of  its  ordinances  in  exact  conformity  to  the  divine 
standard."  Thomas  Campbell  wrote  his  Declaration  and 
Address  in  the  very  midst  of  a  paradise  of  religious 
partyism,  and  while  sectarian  rancor  and  hatred  and 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  151 

jealously  were  consuming  what  little  piety  and  spirit- 
uality were  left  in  the  country.  "Each  party  strove  for 
supremacy,  and  maintained  its  peculiarities  with  a  zeal 
as  ardent  and  persecuting  as  the  laws  of  the  land  and 
the  usages  of  society  would  permit.  The  distinguishing 
tenets  of  each  party  were  constantly  thundered  from 
every  pulpit,  and  any  departure  from  the  'traditions  of 
the  elders,'  was  visited  at  once  with  the  severest  eccle- 
siastical censure.  Covenanting,  church  politics,  church 
psalmody,  hyper-Calviuistic  questions,  were  the  great 
topics  of  the  day;  and  such  was  the  rigid,  uncompro- 
mising spirit  prevailing,  that  the  most  trivial  things 
would  produce  a  schism,  so  that  old  members  were 
known  to  break  off  from  their  congregations  simply 
because  the  clerk  presumed  to  give  out  before  singing 
two  lines  of  a  psalm  instead  of  one,  as  had  been  the 
usual  custom.  Against  this  slavish  subjection  to  custom, 
and  to  opinions  and  regulations  that  were  merely  of 
human  origin,  Mr.  Campbell  had  long  felt  it  his  duty  to 
protest;  and  knowing  no  remedy  for  the  sad  condition 
of  things  existing,  except  in  a  simple  return  to  the  plain 
teachings  of  the  Bible,  as  alone  authoritative  and  bind- 
ing upon  the  conscience,  he  and  those  associated  with 
him  felt  it  incumbent  upon  them  to  urge  this  upon  re- 
ligious society.  This  they  endeavored  to  do  in  the  spirit 
of  moderation  and  Christian  love,  hoping  that  the  over- 
ture would  be  accepted  by  the  religious  communities 
around,  especially  by  those  of  the  Presbyterian  order, 
whose  differences  were,  in  themselves,  so  trivial. "  (Mem- 
oirs of  A.  Campbell, Vo\.  I.,  p.  245.) 

This,  in  brief,  was  the  religious  complexion  of  things 
when  Alexander  Campbell  appeared  upon  the  stage  of 
action,  who  in  the  providence  of  God  was  destined  to 
become  the  chosen  and  distinguished  promnlgator  of 


152         THE  WORD  OF  GOD  THE  SOLE  EULE  OF  ACTION. 

the  reformatory  principles  enunciated  by  his  illustrious 
father.  Up  to  the  period  when  Alexander  Campbell 
comes  to  the  front,  Thomas  Campbell  is  still  a  Presby- 
terian in  faith,  but  a  free  and  independent  thinker. 
While  advocating  Christian  union  upon  the  basis  of  the 
Bible,  he  still  continues  to  baptize  infants.  He  still 
continues  to  be  trammeled  by  the  dogmas  of  Calvinism, 
and  to  struggle  in  the  meshes  of  ecclesiasticism,  but, 
having  placed  himself  upon  the  solid  ground  of  honest 
Bible  exegesis,  and  having  adopted  an  infallible  rule  of 
Scripture  interpretation,  we  shall  soon  see  how  his  prin- 
ciple drove  him,  and  his  Presbyterian  son,  Alexander, 
back  upon  apostolic  ground,  and  how  the  God  of  truth 
guided  their  feet  in  a  way  they  knew  not. 


ATTEMPTS  AT  CHRISTIAN  UNION". 


WHILE  Alexander  Campbell  was  reading  the  proof- 
sheets  of  the  "Declaration,"  in  1809,  soon  after  his 
arrival  in  Washington  from  Scotland,  he  observed  to 
his  father:  "Then,  sir,  you  must  abandon  and  give  up 
infant  baptism,  and  some  other  practices  for  which  it 
seems  to  me  you  can  not  produce  an  express  precept  or 
an  example  in  any  book  of  the  Christian  Scriptures." 
To  which,  after  some  hesitancy,  the  father  responded: 
"'To  the  law  and  to  the  testimony,'  we  make  our 
appeal.  If  not  found  therein,  we,  of  course,  must 
abandon  it."  Then,  as  showing  the  perplexed  condi- 
tion of  his  mind,  he  added:  "We  could  not  unchurch 
ourselves  now,  and  go  out  into  the  world,  and  then  turn 
back  again  and  enter  the  Church  merely  for  the  sake 
of  form  and  decorum."  When,  in  an  accidental  con- 
versation with  Rev.  Mr.  Riddle,  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church  Union,  the  principles  of  the  "Declaration  and 
Address"  were  introduced  as  matters  of  discussion,  and 
when  Alexander  referred  to  the  proposition  that  "noth- 
ing should  be  required  as  a  matter  of  faith  or  duty  for 
which  a 'Thus  saith  the  Lord'  could  not  be  produced, 
either  in  express  terms  or  by  approved  precedent," 
"Sir,"  said  Mr.  Riddle,  "these  words,  however  plausible 
in  appearance,  are  not  sound.  For  if  you  follow  these 
out,  you  must  become  a  Baptist."  "Why,  sir,"  said 
the  young  Alexander,  "  is  there  in  the  Scriptures  no 

(153) 


154  ATTEMPTS  AT  CHRISTIAN  UNION. 

express  precept  uor  precedent  for  infant  baptism?" 
The  youthful  enquirer  was  startled  and  chagrined  that 
lie  could  not  produce  one;  and  forthwith  he  appeals  to 
Andrew  Munro,  the  principal  bookseller  in  Cauousburg, 
to  furnish  him.  all  the  treatises  at  his  command  in  favor 
of  infant  baptism.  He  inquired  for  no  works  on  the 
other  side  of  the  question,  for  at  this  time  he  had  little 
or  no  acquaintance  with  the  Baptists,  and  regarded 
them  as  a  people  comparatively  ignorant  and  uneduca- 
ted, lie  was  thrown  into  a  state  of  doubt  and  perplex- 
ity by  pondering  this  law  of  scriptural  exegesis  as 
previously  announced  by  his  father:  "  We  make  our 
appeal  to  the  law  and  to  the  testimony.  Whatever  is 
not  found  therein,  we,  of  course,  must  abandon."  He 
read  the  pedobaptist  authorities  in  ardent  hopes  of  for- 
tifying his  mind  in  favor  of  infant  baptism.  The  more 
he  investigated,  the  more  his  prejudices  and  predilections 
gave  way,  and  the  conviction  gradually  grew  upon  him 
that  infant  baptism  was  a  human  device.  Thoroughly 
disgusted  with  the  bald  assumptions  and  fallacious  rea- 
sonings of  the  pedobaptist  authorities,  he  threw  them 
all  aside,  and  fled  hopefully  to  the  Greek  New  Testa- 
ment in  the  fond  expectation  of  finding  convincing 
proof  of  the  validity  of  infant  baptism  in  the  fountain 
head.  But  the  plainness  of  the  Greek  text  only  served 
to  strengthen  his  doubts.  And  when  again  he  entered 
into  a  conversation  with  his  father  on  this  vexed  ques- 
tion, he  found  him  entirely  willing  to  admit  that  there 
were  neither  "express  terms"  nor  "precedent"  to 
authorize  the  practice.  "But,"  said  he,  "as  for  those 
who  are  already  members  of  the  Church  and  partici- 
pants of  the  Lord's  Supper,  I  can  see  no  propriety, 
even  if  the  scriptural  evidence  for  infant  baptism  be 
found  deficient,  in  their  unchurching  or  paganizing 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  155 

themselves,  or  in  putting  off  Christ,  merely  for  the 
sake  of  making  a  new  profession ;  and  thus  going  out 
of  the  Church  merely  for  the  sake  of  coming  in  again." 

By  these  continued  discussions  it  will  be  perceived  that 
a  serious  conflict  was  going  on  in  the  minds  of  these  two 
men,  and  especially  in  the  mind  of  the  son,  as  to  the 
question  whether  it  were  belter,  all  things  considered^ 
to  adhere  to  Presbyterian  usages  and  to  the  "  traditions 
of  the  fathers,"  or,  enlightened  by  the  Word  of  God, 
carry  out  the  logic  of  their  own  rules  of  Bible  interpre- 
tation. Being  thoroughly  honest  men,  and  seeking 
only  to  know  the  truth,  and,  above  all,  desiring  to 
effect  Christian  union  exclusively  upon  the  basis  of  the 
Bible,  they  determined  to  take  the  Word  of  God  as 
their  sole  and  infallible  guide.  The  "Declaration  and 
Address"  contains  the  following  sentiments,  as  illustra- 
tive of  the  religious  condition  of  things  then  existing: 

What  dreary  effects  of  those  accursed  divisions  are  to 
be  seen,  even  in  this  highly  favored  country,  where  the 
sword  of  the  civil  magistrate  has  not  yet  learned  to 
serve  at  the  altar!  Have  we  not  seen  congregations 
broken  to  pieces,  neighborhoods  of  professing  Chris- 
tians first  thrown  into  confusion  by  party  contentions, 
and,  in  the  end,  entirely  deprived  of  gospel  ordinances; 
while,  in  the  meanwhile,  large  settlements  and  tracts  of 
country  remain  to  this  day  destitute  of  a  gospel  minis- 
try, many  of  them  in  little  better  than  a  state  of 
heathenism,  the  churches  being  either  so  weakened  by 
divisions  that  they  can  not  send  them  ministers,  or  the 
people  so  divided  among  themselves  that  they  will  not 
receive  them?  Several,  at  the  same  time,  who  live  at 
the  door  of  a  preached  gospel,  dare  not  in  conscience 
go  to  hear  it,  and,  of  course,  enjoy  little  more  advan- 
tage in  that  respect  than  living  in  the  midst  of 
heathens. 

Not  discouraged  by  the  small  progress  made  toward 


156  ATTEMPTS  AT  CHRISTIAN  UNION. 

Christian  union,  and  not  dismayed  by  the  powerful  op- 
position he  encountered  from  his  former  Presbyterian 
brethren,  he  thus,  from  time  to  time,  addresses  his  little 
band : 

"  Dearly  beloved  brethren,  why  should  we  deem  it  a 
thing  incredible  that  the  Church  of  Christ,  in  this  highly 
favored  country,  should  resume  that  original  unity,  peace 
and  purity,  which  belong  to  its  constitution  and  consti- 
tute its  glory?  Or  is  there  anything  that  can  be  justly 
deemed  necessary  for  this  desirable  purpose  but  to  con- 
form to  the  model  and  adopt  the  practice  of  the  primi- 
tive Church,  expressly  exhibited  in  the  New  Testament? 
Whatever  alterations  this  might  produce  in  any  or  in 
all  of  the  churches,  should,  we  think,  neither  be  deemed 
inadmissible  nor  ineligible.  Surely  such  alteration  would 
be  every  way  for  the  better  and  not  for  the  worse,  un- 
less we  should  suppose  the  dh'inely-inspired  rule  to  be 
faulty  or  defective.  Were  we,  then,  in  our  church  con- 
stitution and  managements  to  exhibit  a  complete  con- 
formity to  the  apostolic  Church,  would  we  not  be  in  that 
respect  as  perfect  as  Christ  intended  us  to  be?  And 
should  not  this  suffice  us?" 


FUNDAMENTAL  PRINCIPLES. 


JUST  before  submitting  his  thirteen  propositions  to 
his  brethren  and  to  the  religious  world,  with  a  view  of 
drawing  the  people  away  from  strife  and  contention, 
and  in  order  to  fix  their  minds  upon  the  liberty  of  the 
gospel  with  which  Christ  makes  all  willing  men  free,  he 
says:  "Let  us  not  imagine  that  the  subjoined  proposi- 
tions are  at  all  intended  as  an  overture  toward  a  new 
creed  or  standard  for  the  Church,  or  as  in  any  way  de- 
signed to  be  made  a  term  of  communion;  nothing  can 
be  further  from  our  intention.  They  are  merely  design- 
ed to  open  up  the>  way,  that  we  may  come  fairly  and 
firmly  to  original  ground  upon  clear  and  certain  prem- 
ises, and  take  up  things  just  as  the  apostles  left  them; 
and  thus,  disentangled  from  the  accruing  embarrass- 
ments of  intervening  ages,  we  may  stand  with  evidence 
upon  the  same  ground  on  which  the  Church  stood  at 
the  beginning." 

Here  indeed  was  the  beginning  of  radical  work.  Here 
was  a  proposition  to  pass  back  over  all  human  author- 
ities, over  all  the  traditions  and  false  dogmas  of  "inter- 
vening ages,"  and  begin  a  thorough  restoration  of  the 
ancient  order  of  things.  Neither  Luther  nor  any  one  else 
since  his  day  ever  attempted  such  a  revolution.  Thomas 
Campbell  proposed  to  set  aside  the  decrees  of  Popes, 
Councils,  Synods,  Conferences  and  General  Assemblies, 
and  to  ignore  all  the  traditions  and  corrupt  practices  of 

(157) 


158  FUNDAMENTAL  PRINCIPLES. 

an  apostate  Church,  and  to  build  upon  Christ  alone. 
Here  was  an  invitation  to  come  directly  to  the  primitive 
model — to  return  to  pristine  purity  and  perfection — and, 
consentaneous  with  that  act,  the  rejection  of  all  human 
innovations,  andthe  repudiation  of  all  human  authority. 
It  seems  as  though  God  guided  and  guarded  the  hand 
that  penned  such  grand  and  startling  propositions. 

What  a  mighty  revolution  have  these  propositions 
wrought  within  the  last  half  century.  The  thoughts 
contained  in  these  propositions  have  changed  and  mod- 
ified the  theology  of  the  entire  religious  world,  have  in- 
fluenced every  pulpit,  have  changed  the  tone  of  every 
religious  journal,  and  still  continue  to  challenge  inves- 
tigation. As  the  propositions  referred  to  are  not  access- 
ible to  many  of  our  readers,  we  think  we  are  rendering 
valuable  service  by  reproducing  several,  if  not  all  of 
them  in  this  connection. 

PROPOSITION  1.  That  the  Church  of  Christ  upon  earth 
is  essentially,  intentionally  and  constitutionally  one; 
consisting  of  all  those  in  every  place- that  profess  their 
faith  in  Christ  and  obedience  to  him  in  all  things  accord- 
ing to  the  Scriptures,  and  that  manifest  the  same  by 
their  tempers  and  conduct;  and  none  else,  as  none  else 
can  be  truly  and  properly  called  Christians. 

2.  That,  although  the  Church  of  Christ  upon  earth 
must  necessarily  exist  in  particular  and  distinct  societies, 
locally  separate  one  from  the  other,  yet  there  ought  to 
be  no  schisms,  no  uncharitable  divisions  among  them. 
They  ought  to  receive  each  other,  as  Jesus  Christ  hath 
also  received  them,  to  the  glory  of  God.     And,  for  this 
purpose,  they  ought  all  to  valk  by  the  same  rule;  to  mind 
and  speak  the  same  things,  and  to  be  perfectly  joined  to- 
gether in  the  same  mind  and  in  the  same  judgment. 

3.  That,  in  order  to  this,  nothing  ought  to  be  incul- 
cated upon   Christians  as  articles  of  faith,  nor  required 
of  them  as  terms  of  communion,  but  what  is  expressly 
taught  and  enjoined  upon  them  in  the  Word  of  God.     Nor 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  159 

ought  anything  to  be  admitted  as  of  divine  obligation 
in  their  Church  constitution  and  managements,  but  what 
is  expressly  enjoined  by  the  authority  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  and  his  apostles  upon  the  New  Testament  Church, 
either  in  express  terms  or  by  approved  precedent. 

4.  That,  although  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  are 
inseparably  connected,  making  together  but  one  perfect 
and  entire  revelation  of  the  divine  will  for  the  edifica- 
tion and  salvation  of  the  Church,  and,  therefore,  in  that 
respect  can  not  be  separated;  yet,  as  to  what  directly 
and  properly  belongs  to  their  immediate  object,  the  New 
Testament  is  as  perfect  a  constitution  for  the  worship,  dis- 
cipline and  government  of  the  New  Testament  Church,  and 
as  perfect  a  rale  for  the  particular  duties  of  its  members, 
as  the  Old  Testament  was  for  the  worship,  discipline  and 
government  of  the  Old  Testament  Church  and  the  par- 
ticular duties  of  its  members. 

5.  That  with  respect  to  commands  and  ordinances  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  where  the  Scriptures  are  silent 
as  to  the  express  time  or  manner  of  performance,  if  any 
such  there  be,  no  human  authority  has  power  to  interfere 
in  order  to  supply  the  supposed  deficiency  by  making  laws 
for  the  Church,  nor  can  anything  be  more  required  of 
Christians  in  such  cases  but  only  that  they  so  observe 
these  commands  and  ordinances  as  will  evidently  answer 
the  declared  and  obvious  ends  of  their  institution.    Much 
less  has  any  human  authority  power  to  impose  new  com- 
mands or  ordinances  upon  the  Church,  which  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  has  not  enjoined.     Nothing  ought  to  be  re- 
ceived into  the  faith  or  worship  of  the  Church,  or  be 
made  a  term  of  communion  among  Christians,  that  is 
not  as  old  as  the  New  Testament. 

6.  That   although   inferences    and    deductions   from 
Scripture  premises,  when  fairly  inferred,   may  be  truly 
called  the  doctrine  of  God's  holy  word,  yet  arc  they  not 
formally  binding  upon  the  consciences  of  Christians  fur- 
ther than  they  perceive  the  connection,  and  evidently 
see  they  are  so,  for  their  faith  must  not  stand  in  the 
wisdom  of  men,  but  in  the  [tower  and  veracity  of  God. 
Therefore  no  such   deductions  can  be  made  terms  of 


160  FUNDAMENTAL  PRINCIPLES. 

communion,  but  do  properly  belong  to  the  after  and 
progressive  edification  of  the  Church.  Hence,  it  is  evi- 
dent that  no  sack  deductions  or  inferential  truths  ought  to 
have  any  place  in  the  Church's  Confession. 

Proposition  12  reads  as  follows  : 

That  all  that  is  necessary  to  the  highest  state  of  per- 
fection and  purity  of  the  Church  upon  earth  is,  first, 
that  none  be  received  as  members  but  such  as,  having 
that  due  measure  of  scriptural  self-knowledge  described 
above,  do  profess  their  faith  in  Christ  and  obedience  to 
him  in  all  things  according  to  the  Scriptures;  nor,  sec- 
ondly, that  any  be  retained  in  her  communion  longer  than 
they  continue  to  manifest  the  reality  of  their  profession 
by  temper  and  conduct.  Thirdly,  that  her  ministers, 
duly  and  scripturally  qualified,  inculcate  none  other 
things  than  those  very  articles  of  faith  and  holiness 
expressly  revealed  and  enjoined  in  the  Word  of  God. 
Lastly,  that  in  all  their  administrations  they  keep  close 
by  the  observance  of  all  divine  ordinances,  after  the  ex- 
ample of  the  primitive  Church,  exhibited  in  the  New  Test- 
ament, without  any  additions  whatsoever  of  human  opin- 
ions or  inventions  of  men. 

We  have  italicized  certain  phrases  in  these  proposi- 
tions, in  order  to  enlist  the  special  attention  of  our  read- 
ers. The  sentiments  contained  in  these  propositions 
are  the  sentiments  strenuously  advocated  by  the  friends 
of  the  Review,  and  the  same  that  wo  have  persistently 
urged  in  the  past.  These  sublime  statements  constitute 
no  creed,  but  they  simply  indicate  the  fixed  purpose  of 
the  author,  which  is  also  our  fixed  purpose,  viz :  the 
complete  restoration  of  the  primitive  order  of  things, 
in  commands,  precepts,  ordinances,  worship  and  dis- 
cipline. 


THE  RESTORATION. 


IN  defending  his  thirteen  propositions  against  the 
heated  assaults  of  his  Presbyterian  ministerial  breth- 
ren, who  tried  in  every  possible  way  to  inveigle  him  in 
self-contradictions  and  inconsistencies,  Thomas  Camp- 
bell sought  to  draw  a  distinction  between  faith  and 
opinion,  between  an  express  scriptural  declaration  and 
inferences  which  may  be  deduced  from  it.  By  the  lat- 
ter were  meant  such  conclusions  as  were  not  necessarily 
involved  in  the  Scripture  premises,  and  which  were  to 
be  regarded  as  private  opinions,  and  not  to  be  made  a 
rule  of  faith  or  duty  to  any  one.  In  order  to  obtain  the 
true  meaning  of  Scripture,  "the  whole  revelation  was 
to  be  taken  together,  or  in  its  due  connection  upon 
every  article,  and  not  on  any  detached  sentence."  If, 
in  consequence  of  thus  allowing  full  freedom  of  opin- 
ion, any  should  bring  forward  the  charge  of  latitudi- 
narianism,  they  are  requested  to  consider  whether  this 
charge  does  not  lie  against  those  who  add  their  opinions 
to  the  Word  of  God,  rather  than  against  those  who  in- 
sist upon  returning  to  the  profession  and  practice  of  the 
primitive  Church.  A  return  to  the  Bible,  he  insisted, 
was  the  only  way  to  get  rid  of  existing  sectarian  evils. 
He  goes  on  to  say  that  "a  manifest  attachment  to  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  faith,  holiness  and  charity,  was  the 
original  criterion  of  Christian  character;  the  distin- 
guishing badge  of  our  holy  profession;  the  foundation 
14  (161) 


162  THE  RESTORATION. 

and  cement  of  Christian  unity.  But  now,  alas!  and 
long  since,  an  external  name,  a  mere  educational  form- 
ality of  sameness  in  the  profession  of  a  certain  standard 
or  formula  of  human  fabric,  with  a  very  moderate  de- 
gree of  what  is  called  morality,  forms  the  bond  and 
foundation,  the  root  and  reason  of  ecclesiastical  unity. 
Thomas  Campbell  speaks  like  an  oracle,  as  he  continues 
his  arraignment  of  the  hypocritical  clergy  of  his  day, 
of  whom  we  find  a  counterpart  in  the  present  day. 
What  was  then  true  of  the  clerical  profession  is  still 
true.  "Can  an  Ethiopian  change  his  skin,  or  a  leopard  his 
spots?"  Referring  to  those  who  love  the  creed  above 
the  Bible,  and  who  prefer  leadership  in  sectarian  divi- 
sion to  the  unity  of  hearts  in  Christ,  he  says: 

Take  from  such  the  technicalities  of  their  profession, 
the  shibboleth  of  party,  and  what  have  they  more? 
What  have  they  left  to  distinguish  and  hold  them  to- 
gether? As  to  the  .Bible,  they  are  little  beholden  to  it; 
they  have  learned  little  from  it,  they  know  little  about 
it,  and  therefore  depend  as  little  upon  it.  I^ay,  they 
will  even  tell  you  it  would  be  of  little  use  to  them  with- 
out their  formula;  they  could  not  know  a  Papist  from 
a  Protestant  by  it;  that  merely  by  it  they  could  neither 
keep  the  Church  nor  themselves  right  for  a  single  week. 
You  might  preach  to  them  what  you  please,  they  could 
not  distinguish  truth  from  error.  Poor  people!  it  is  no 
wonder  they  are  so  fond  of  their  formula.  Therefore 
they  that  exercise  authority  upon  them,  and  tell  them 
what  they  are  to  believe  and  what  they  are  to  do,  are 
called  benefactors.  These  are  the  reverend  and  right 
reverend  authors,  upon  whom  they  can  and  do  place  a 
more  implicit  confidence  than  upon  the  holy  apostles 
and  prophets.  These  plain,  honest,  unassuming  men, 
who  would  never  venture  to  say  or  do  anything  in  the 
name  of  the  Lord  without  an  express  revelation  from 
heaven,  and,  therefore,  were  never  distinguished  by  the 
venerable  title  of  "Rabbi"  or  "Reverend,"  but  just 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  163 

simply  Paul,  John,  Thomas,  etc. — these  were  but  ser- 
vants. They  did  not  assume  to  legislate,  and,  therefore, 
neither  assumed  nor  received  any  honorary  titles  among 
men,  but  merely  such  as  were  descriptive  of  their  office. 
And  how,  we  beseech  you,  shall  this  gross  and  prevalent 
corruption  be  purged  out  of  the  visible  professing 
Church  but  by  a  radical  reform,  but  by  a  returning  to 
the  original  simplicity,  the  primitive  purity  of  the 
Christian  institution,  and,  of  course,  taking  up  things 
just  as  we  find  them  upon  the  sacred  page?  And  who 
is  there  that  knows  anything  of  the  present  state  of  the 
Church,  who  does  not  perceive  that  it  is  generally  over- 
run with  the  aforesaid  evils?  Or  who,  that  reads  his 
Bible,  and  receives  the  impressions  it  must  necessarily 
produce  upon  the  receptive  mind  by  the  statements  it 
exhibits,  does  not  perceive  that  such  a  state  of  things  is 
as  distinct  from  genuine  Christianity  as  oil  is  from 
water? 

In  opposition  to  the  claim  made  that  a  creed  secures 
uniformity  of  belief  and  purity  of  doctrine,  history 
attests  that  Arians,  Socinians,  Arminians,  Calvinists 
and  Antinomians,  have  existed  under  the  Westminster 
Confession,  and  under  the  Athanasian  Creed  or  the 
Articles  of  the  Church  of  England. 

"Will  any  one  say,"  it  is  asked,  "that  a  person  might 
not  with  equal  ease,  honesty  and  consistency,  be  an 
Arian  or  a  Socinian  in  his  heart  while  subscribing  to 
the  Westminster  Confession  or  the  Athanasian  Creed, 
as  while  making  his  unqualified  profession  to  believe 
everything  that  the  Scriptures  declare  concerning  Christ? 
— to  put  all  that  confidence  in  him,  and  to  ascribe  all 
that  glory,  honor  and  thanksgiving  and  praise  to  him 
professed  and  ascribed  to  him  in  the  divine  word?  If 
you  say  not,  it  follows,  of  undeniable  consequence,  that 
the  wisdom  of  men,  in  those  compilations,  has  effected 
what  the  divine  wisdom  either  could  not,  would  not,  or 
did  not  do  in  that  all  perfect  and  glorious  revelation  of 
his  will  contained  in  the  Holy  Scriptures.  Happy 
emendation!  Blessed  expedient!  Happy,  indeed,  for 


164  THE  RESTORATION. 

the  Church  that  Athanasius  arose  in  the  fourth  century 
to  perfect  what  the  apostles  had  left  in  such  a  crude  and 
unfinished  state  1  But  if,  after  all,  the  divine  wisdom 
did  not  think  proper  to  do  anything  more,  or  anything 
else,  than  is  already  done  in  the  sacred  oracles,  to  settle 
and  determine  those  important  points,  who  can  say  that 
he  determined  such  a  thing  as  should  be  done  after- 
ward? Or  has  he  anywhere  given  us  any  intimation  of 
such  an  intention  ?" 

In  regard  to  the  charge  of  an  intention  to  make  a 
new  party,  Thomas  Campbell  said,  in  further  defense 
of  his  Thirteen  Propositions:  "If  the  divine  word  be 
not  the  standard  of  a  party,  then  are  we  not  a  party, 
for  we  have  adopted  no  other.  If  to  maintain  its  alone- 
sufficiency  be  not  a  party  principle,  then  we  are  not  a 
party.  If  to  justify  this  principle  by  our  practice  in 
making  a  rule  of  it,  and  of  it  alone,  and  not  of  our  own 
opinions,  nor  those  of  others,  be  not  a  party  principle, 
then  we  are  not  a  party.  If  to  propose  and  practice 
neither  more  nor  less  than  it  expressly  reveals  and 
enjoins  be  not  a  partial  business,  then  we  are  not  a 
party.  These  are  the  very  sentiments  we  have  ap-. 
proved  and  recommended,  as  a  society  formed  for  the 
express  purpose  of  promoting  Christian  unity  in  oppo- 
sition to  a  party  spirit." 

"We  have  thus  quoted  copiously  from  the  writings  of 
Thomas  Campbell,  while  he  was  yet  a  Presbyterian  in 
name,  if  not  in  faith,  to  give  our  readers  a  clear  concep- 
tion of  the  origin  of  the  so-called  "Reformation"'  of  the 
nineteenth  century,  and  to  show  also  that  the  plea  we 
are  now  making  in  favor  of  a  complete  restoration  of 
primitive  Christianity  is  based  upon  the  principles  con- 
tained in  that  remarkable  document  styled  the  "Decla- 
ration and  Address."  Says  Dr.  Richardson,  in  his 
Memoirs  of  A.  Campbell:  "So  fully  and  so  kindly  was 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  165 

every  possible  objection  considered  and  refuted,  that  no 
attempt  was  ever  made  by  the  opposers  of  the  proposed 
movement  to  controvert  directly  a  single  position  which  it 
contained."  Says  the  same  biographer:  "To  all  the 
propositions  and  reasonings  of  this  Address,  Alexander 
Campbell  gave  at  once  his  hearty  approbation,  as  they 
expressed  most  clearly  the  convictions  to  which  he  had 
himself  been  brought  by  his  experience  and  observation 
in  Scotland,  and  his  reflections  upon  the  state  of  relig- 
ious society  at  large.  Captivated  by  its  clear  and 
decisive  presentations  of  duty,  and  the  noble  Christian 
enterprise  to  which  it  invited,  he  at  once,  though  un- 
provided with  worldly  property,  and  aware  that  the 
proposed  reformation  would,  .in  all  probability,  provoke 
the  hostility  of  the  religious  parties,  resolved  to  conse- 
crate his  life  to  the  advocacy  of  the  principles  which  it 
presented.  Accordingly,  when,  soon  afterward,  his 
father  took  occasion  ,to  inquire  as  to  his  arrangements 
for  the  future,  he  at  once  informed  him  that  he  had 
determined  to  devote  himself  to  the  dissemination  and 
support  of  the  principles  and  views  presented  in  the 
"Declaration  and  Address." 

Thomas  Campbell,  having  been  solicited  both  by  pri- 
vate members  and  by  some  of  the  ministers  of  the  Presby- 
terian Church,  to  form  an  ecclesiastical  union  with  them; 
and  having  been  assured  by  certain  Presbyterian  minis- 
ters that  the  Presbytery  generally  would  willingly  re- 
ceive him  and  the  members  of  the  Christian  Association 
upon  the  principles  they  advocated,  made  overtures 
looking  to  that  end,  in  the  fond  hope  that  by  operating 
through  the  Presbyterian  Church  and  its  various  agencies 
he  might  be  enabled  to  advance  more  effectively  the 
cause  of  Christian  union.  Alexander  had  little  confi- 
dence that  his  father  would  succeed  in  propitiating  the 


166  THE  RESTORATION. 

excited  spirit  of  the  Presbyterians,  who  stood  more  upon 
their  ecclesiastical  dignity  than  upon  their  love  of  Chris- 
tian union.  The  "Synod  of  Pittsburg"  assembled  at 
Washington,  Pa.,  on  the  second  day  of  October,  1810. 
This  august  body  refused  to  receive  the  reformer  into 
their  body.  The  grounds  of  their  objection,  it  appears, 
were  the  fears  they  entertained  in  regard  to  the  influ- 
ence of  the  Christian  Association,  which,  as  before 
stated,  was  organized  with  the  sole  view  of  promoting 
Christian  union.  And  it  is  a  noteworthy  fact  that  the 
Presbyterians  have  not,  since  that  day,  cultivated  the 
least  disposition  for  Christian  union,  upon  the  basis  of 
the  Bible  or  upon  any  other  basis.  In  his  address  before 
the  Synod,  Mr.  Campbell  was  careful  to  define  clearly 
the  position  which  the  society  occupied,  and  to  state 
that  it  was  in  no  sense  a  Church,  but  simply  a  society 
organized  for  the  promotion  of  Christian  unity.  He 
earnestly  and  affectionately  proposed  to  the  Synod  to 
be  obedient  to  it  in  all  things  that  the  gospel  and  the 
law  of  Christ  inculcated,  only  desiring  to  be  permitted 
to  advocate  that  sacred  unity  which  Christ  and  his  apos- 
tles expressly  enjoined;  or,  in  other  words,  that  the 
Synod  would  consent  to  "Christian  union  upon  Chris- 
tian principles."  The  Synod  rejected  his  overtures  be- 
cause he  would  not  unite  with  them  on  Presbyterian 
principles. 


THE  BIBLE  THE  ONLY  CREED, 


WHEN  Thomas  Campbell,  from  a  sense  of  duty,  made 
his  second  appeal  to  the  same  Synod,  which  had  in  the 
first  instance  replied  to  him  in  very  ambiguous  terms, 
and  asked  for  an  explanation  of  the  clause  "many  other 
important  reasons,"  by  which  the  Synod  attempted  to 
justify  its  action,  this  grave  body  of  ecclesiastics  finds 
one  of  them  in  the  childish  and  frivolous  pretext  that 
Alexander  had  been  allowed  to  exercise  his  gift  of  pub- 
lic speaking,  as  it  alleges,  "without  any  regular  author- 
ity," or  before  ordination — a  liberty  taken  both  by  Knox 
and  Calvin,  and  one  frequently  granted  to  theological 
students.  The  unrighteousness  of  the  rejection  of  the 
application"  of  Thomas  Campbell  is  made  manifest  by 
the  fact  that  the  Confession  of  Faith,  under  which  the 
Synod  acted,  declares  the  Bible  to  be  the  only  rule  of 
faith  and  practice;  and  yet  when  a  respectable  body  of 
Christian  people  ask  for  admission,  they  are  ruled  out 
- — cashiered — because  they  will  come  under  no  other  rule 
than  the  Bible!  For  adhering  to  the  "only  rule,"  ad- 
mitted to  be  inspired  and  infallible,  and  for  presuming 
to  doubt  the  infallibility  of  the  Westminster  Confession 
— the  production  of  uninspired  men — they  are  rejected  : 
rejected,  not  for  any  violation  of  the  "only  rule,"  but 
because  they  can  not  admit  that  a  human  creed  or  con- 
fession is  in  reality  the  "only  rule."  Says  Dr.  Richard- 
son, in  his  Memoirs  of  A.  Campbell:  "How  completely 

(167) 


168  THE  BIBLE  THE  ONLY  CREED. 

this  verified  the  remark  made  by  Mr.  Campbell  in  his 
Declaration  and  Address,  'That  a  book  adopted  by  any 
party  as  its  standard  for  all  matters  of  doctrine,  worship, 
discipline  and  government,  must  be  considered  as  the 
•Bible  of  that  party!'  And  how  evident  it  is  that,  in 
the  sectarian  world,  there  are  just  as  many  different 
Bibles  as  there  are  different  and  authoritative  explana- 
tions of  the  Bible,  called  creeds  and  confessions!  In  the 
case  of  Thomas  Campbell,  it  was  the  '  Confession,'  and 
not  the  Bible,  that  was  made  the  standard  by  which  one 
of  the  best  men  was  denied  religious  fellowship."  Is  it 
possible  for  sectarian  bigotry  to  go  beyond  this? 

Alexander  Campbell,  at  the  age  of  twenty-two,  now 
comes  forward,  enters  the  arena  of  public  conflict,  re- ' 
views  the  action  of  this  Synod,  and  not  only  justifies 
the  course  pursued  by  his  father,  but  takes  more  ad- 
vanced ground  than  that  occupied  by  his  father.  The 
Christian  Association  of  Washington  held  its  semi-an- 
nual meeting  at  Washington  on  Thursday,  the  first  of 
November,  1810.  Alexander,  the  young  polemic,  was 
not  made  of  such  stuff  as  to  tamely  submit  to  the  pro- 
ceedings of  the  Synod  in  relation  to  his  father  and  the 
Christian  Association,  and  he  therefore  resolved  to  avail 
himself  of  the  first  opportunity  to  examine  them  pub- 
licly. We  have  not  space  for  the  reproduction  of  this 
masterly  review.  As  to  the  views  entertained  at  this 
time  by  Alexander  Campbell  and  his  father,  it  appears 
from  the  contents  of  the  address  delivered  on  the  occa- 
sion referred  to,  (1)  that  they  regarded  the  religious 
parties  around  them  as  possessing  the  substance  of  Chris- 
tianity, but  as  having  failed  to  preserve  "the  form  of 
sound  words,"  in  which  it  was  proclaimed  in  apostolic 
days;  and  that  the  chief  object  in  the  proposed  reform- 
ation was  an  effort  to  induce  all  good  people  to  abandon 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  169 

every  human  system,  and  persuade  them  to  the  adoption 
of  "this  form  of  sound  words,"  as  the  infallible  basis  of 
Christian  union.  (2)  That  they  regarded  each  congre- 
gation as  an  independent  organization,  enjoying  its  own 
individuality,  and  maintaining  its  own  internal  govern- 
ment by  elders  and  deacons,  and  yet  not  so  absolutely 
independent  of  other  congregations  as  not  to  be  bound 
to  them  by  fraternal  and  spiritual  relations.  (3)  That 
they  considered  "lay  preaching"  as  authorized,  and  de- 
nied the  distinction  between  clergy  and  laity  to  be  scrip- 
tural. (4)  That  they  looked  upon  infant  baptism  as 
without  direct  scriptural  authority,  but  that  they  were 
willing  to  let  it  rest  as  a  matter  of  forbearance,  and  al- 
low the  continuance  of  the  practice  in  the  case  of  those 
who  conscientiously  approved  it,  as  Paul  and  James 
permitted  circumcision  for  a  time  in  deference  to  Jewish 
prejudices.  (5)  That  they  clearly  anticipated  the  prob- 
ability of  being  compelled,  on  account  of  the  refusal  of 
the  religious  parties  to  accept  their  overture,  to  resolve 
the  Christian  Association  into  a  distinct  Church,  in  or- 
der to  carry  out  for  themselves  the  duties  and  obliga- 
tions enjoined  on  them  in  the  Scriptures.  (6)  That  in 
receiving  nothing  but  what  was  expressly  revealed,  they 
foresaw  and  admitted  that  many  things  deemed  precious 
and  important  by  the  existing  religious  societies,  must 
inevitably  be  excluded. 

Where,  among  all  the  existing  sects,  do  you  find  such 
sentiments  uttered  as  were  uttered  by  Thomas  Camp- 
bell? Is  there  one  prominent  man  among  any  of  the 
denominations,  at  tins  time,  who  proposes  such  meas- 
ures of  reform  as  were  instituted  by  Thomas  Campbell? 
Do  you  hear  any  of  our  Protestant  divines  talk  as  he 
talked,  and  do  you  see  any  of  them  labor  as  he  labored, 
to  crush  out  sectarianism  and  to  purify  the  Church  of  all 
15 


170  T11E  BIBLE  T11E  ONLY  CREED. 

tradition?  Do  you  iiiid  one  Protestant  minister  among 
ten  thousand  ministers  making  the  least  plea  for  Chris- 
tian union  upon  the  basis  of  the  Bible?  Not  one.  In- 
tellectually and  morally,  in  comparison  with  Thomas 
Campbell,  they  are  all  pigmies, 


ALEXANDER  CAMPBELL  ABANDONS  SECTA- 
RIANISM. 


UP  to  March,  1812,  wnen  the  first  child  of  Alexander 
Campbell  was  born,  the  question  of  infant  baptism  had 
not  given  him  much  concern;  it  had  not  become  to  him 
a  question  of  practical  interest.  Up  to  this  period,  the 
unity  of  the  Church,  and  the  overthrow  of  sectarianism, 
and  the  restoration  of  the  Bible  to  its  original  position, 
had  chiefly  engaged  his  attention.  In  comparison  with 
these  objects,  the  question  of  baptism  was  one  of  small 
importance,  and,  hence,  neither  himself  nor  his  father 
entertained  any  decided  convictions  upon  this  subject. 
About  a  year  before  the  time  we  are  speaking  of,  in  a 
sermon  founded  on  Mark  xvi.  15, 16,  he  said:  "As  I  am 
sure  it  is  unsriptural  to  make  tin*  matter  a  term  of  com- 
munion, I  let  it  slip.  I  wish  to  think  and  let  others  think 
on  these  matters."  But  the  unqualified  adoption  of  the 
principle,  "  Where  the  Bible  speaks,  we  speak;  where  the 
Bible  is  silent,  we  are  silent''  began  to  press  upon  him, 
and  upon  those  who  attended  the  Brush  Run  Church, 
where  the  question  of  baptism  was  beginning  to  be  dis- 
cussed as  one  of  considerable  importance.  The  reading 
and  investigation  of  the  great  commission  which  Christ 
gave  to  his  apostles,  began  to  give  him  serious  concern- 
Admitting  that  infant  baptism  was  without  divine  war. 
rant,  the  question  began  to  assume  quite  a  different  as- 

(171) 


172   ALEXANDER  CAMPBELL  ABANDONS  SECTARIANISM. 

pect,  and  was  now  no  longer,  "May  we  safely  reject 
infant  baptism  as  a  human  invention?"  but,  "May  \ve 
omit  believers'  baptism,  which  all  admit  to  be  divinely 
commanded?"  He  began  to  be  troubled  with  the  ques- 
tion, "If  the  baptism  of  infants  be  without  divine  war- 
rant, it  is  invalid,  and  they  who  receive  it  arc,  in  point 
of  fact,  still  unbaptized.  When  they  come  to  know  this 
in  after  }-ears,  will  God  accept  the  credulity  of  the  par- 
ent for  the  faith  of  the  child?  Men  may  be  pleased  to 
'omit  faith  on  the  part  of  the  person  baptized,  but  will 
God  sanction  the  omission  of  baptism  on  the  part  of  the 
believer,  on  the  ground  that  in  his  infancy  he  had  been 
the  subject  of  a  ceremony  which  had  not  been  enjoined? 
On  the  other  hand,  if  the  practice  of  infant  baptism  can 
be  justified  by  inferential,  reasoning  or  any  sufficient  evi- 
dence, why  should  it  not  be  adopted  or  continued  by 
common  consent,  without  further  discussion?" 

Such  were  some  of  the  reasonings  which,  at  this  time, 
pressed  heavily  upon  the  clear  mind  and  honest  heart 
of  the  youthful  Alexander  Campbell.  Having  finally 
abandoned  all  uninspired  authorities,  he  began  a  critical 
examination  of  the  words  rendered  baptism  and  baptize 
in  the  original  Greek,  and,  as  a  result  of  his  research, 
he  became  thoroughly  satisfied  that  they  could  mean 
only  immersion  and  immerse.  Further  investigation  led 
him  to  the  clear  and  indisputable  conviction  that  believ- 
ers, and  believers  only,  are  proper  scriptural  subjects  of 
baptism.  The  searching  investigations  he  instituted, 
led  him  to  perceive  that  the  rite  of  sprinkling,  to  which 
he  had  been  subjected  i  i  infancy,  was  wholly  unauthor- 
ized, and  that  consequently  he  was,  in  point  of  fact,  an 
unbaptized  person,  and  hence  could  not,  consistently, 
preach  a  baptism  to  others  of  which  he  himself  had 
never  been  a  subject.  Concerning  the  immersion  of  A. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  173 

Campbell  and  others,  we  quote  the  following  interesting 
narrative  from  the  Memoirs  of  A.  Campbell: 

As  he  was  not  one  who  could  remain  long  without 
carrying  out  his  convictions  of  duty,  he  resolved  at  once 
to  obey  what  he  now,  in  the  light  of  the  Scriptures, 
found  to  be  a  postive  divine  command.  Having  formed 
some  acquaintance  with  a  Matthias  Luce,  a  Baptist 
preachor,  who  lived  above  Washington,  he  concluded 
to  make  application  to  him  to  perform  the  rite,  and,  on 
his  way  to  visit  him,  called  to  see  his  father  and  the 
family,  who  were  then  living  on  a  little  farm  between 
Washington  and  Mt.  Pleasant.  Soon  after  arriving, 
his  sister  Dorothea  took  him  aside,  and  told  him  that 
she  had  been  in  great  trouble  for  some  time  about  her 
baptism.  She  could  find,  she  said,  no  authority  what- 
ever for  infant  baptism,  and  could  not  resist  the  convic- 
tion that  she  never  had  been  scripturally  baptized.  She 
wished  him,  therefore,  to  represent  the  case  on  her 
behalf,  to  her  father.  At  this  unexpected  announce- 
ment, Alexander  smiled,  and  told  her  that  he  was  now 
on  his  way  to  request  the  services  of  Mr.  Luce,  as  he 
had  himself  determined  to  be  immersed,  and  would  lay 
the  whole  case  before  their  father.  He  took  the  first 
opportunity,  accordingly,  of  presenting  the  matter, 
stating  the  course  he  had  pursued  and  the  conclusions 
he  had  reached.  His  father,  somewhat  to  his  surprise, 
had  but  little  to  say,  and  offered  no  particular  objection. 
He  spoke  of  the  position  they  had  heretofore  occupied 
in  regard  to  this  question,  but  forbore  to  urge  it  in  op- 
position to  Alexander's  conscientious  convictions.  lie 
finally  remarked,  "I  have  no  more  to  add.  You  must 
please  yourself."  It  was  suggested,  however,  that  in 
view  of  the  public  position  they  occupied  as  religious 
teachers  and  advocates  of  reformation,  it  would  be 
proper  that  the  matter  should  be  publicly  announced 
and  attended  to  amongst  the  people  to  whom  they  had 
been  accustomed  to  preach;  and  he  requested  Alexan- 
der to  get  Mr.  Luce  to  call  with  him  on  his  way  down, 
at  whatever  time  might  be  appointed. 

Wednesday,  the  12th  day  of  June,  1812,  having  been 


174      ALEXANDER  CAMPBELL  ABANDONS  SECTARIANISM. 

selected,  Elder  Luce,  in  company  with  Elder  Henry 
Spears,  called  at  Thomas  Campbell's  on  their  way  to 
the  place  chosen  for  the  immersion,  which  was  the  deep 
pool  in  Buffalo  Creek,  where  three  members  of  the  As- 
sociation had  formerly  been  baptized.  Next  morning, 
as  they  were  setting  out,  Thomas  Campbell  simply  re- 
marked that  Mrs.  Campbell  had  put  up  a  change  of 
raiment  for  herself  and  him,  which  was  the  lirst  intima- 
tion given  that  they  intended  also  to  be  immersed. 
Upon  arriving  at  the  place,  as  the  greater  part  of  the 
members  of  the  Brush  Run  Church,  with  a  large 
concourse  of  others,  attracted  by  the  novelty  of  the 
occasion,  were  assembled  at  David  Bryant's  house,  near 
the  place,  Thomas  Campbell  thought  it  proper  to  pre- 
sent, in  full,  the  reasons  which  had  determined  his 
course.  In  a  very  long  address  he  accordingly  re- 
viewed the  entire  ground  which  he  had  occupied,  and 
the  struggles  that  he  had  undergone  in  reference  to  the 
particular  subject  of  baptism,  which  he  had  earnestly 
desired  to  dispose  of,  in  such  a  manner,  that  it  might  be 
no  hindrance  in  the  attainment  of  Christian  unity  which 
he  had  labored  to  establish  upon  the  Bible  alone.  In 
endeavoring  to  do  this,  he  admitted  that  he  had  been 
led  to  overlook  its  importance,  and  the  very  many  plain 
and  obvious  teachings  of  the  Scriptures  on  the  subject; 
but  having  at  length  attained  a  clearer  view  of  duty,  he 
felt  it  incumbent  upon  him  to  submit  to  what  he  now 
plainly  saw  was  an  important  Divine  institution.  Alex- 
ander afterward  followed  in  an  extended  defense  of  their 
proceedings,  urging  the  necessity  of  submitting  implic- 
itly to  all  God's  commands,  and  showing  that  the 
baptism  of  believers  only  was  authorized  by  the  Word 
of  God. 

Seven  persons  were  immersed — Alexander  Campbell 
and  his  wife;  his  father  and  mother,  and  his  sister;  with 
James  Ilanen  and  his  wife,  the  latter  being  a  very  intel- 
ligent and  courageous  woman.  Alexander  had  stipula- 
ted witli  Elder  Luce  that  the  ceremony  should  be 
performed  precisely  according  to  the  apostolic  pattern, 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  175 

and  that,  as  there  was  no  account  given  to  show  that 
converts  in  primitive  times  were  called  upon  to  give 
what  is  termed  a  "Christian  experience,"  before  they 
had  entered  upon  a  Christian  life,  this  modern  custom 
should  he  omitted,  and  that  the  candidates  should  he 
admitted  on  the  simple  confession  that  "Jesus  Christ  is 
the  Son  of  the  living  God."  Elder  Luce  at  first  ob- 
jected, as  being  contrary  to  Baptist  usage,  but  finally 
yielded,  believing  that  the  demand  was  right,  and  that 
he  would  run  the  risk  of  censure.  All  were,  therefore, 
admitted  to  immersion  upon  making  the  simple  but 
comprehensive  confession  of  Christ,  the  same  as  that 
which  was  required  in  apostolic  times.  This  meeting, 
it  is  related,  continued  about  seven  hours.  From  what 
has  been  related  in  the  foregoing  chapters,  one  can 
rer.dily  perceive  that  the  results  of  honest  investigation 
thus  practically  brought  to  an  issue,  had  been  reached 
only  through  a  series  of  severe  mental  struggles. 
Thomas  Cumpbell  had  been  a  pedobaptist  minister  for 
twenty-five  years.  It  never  entered  his  mind,  when  he 
first  began  to  advocate  Christian  union  among  Presby- 
terians, that  his  principles  would  actually  lead  to  the 
abandonment  of  infant  baptism.  Having  accomplished 
his  special  mission  in  propounding  and  developing  the 
true  basis  of  Christian  union,  which,  in  a  general  way, 
was  enunciated  in  his  "Declaration  and  Address,"  and 
beyond  which  general  principle  of  union  he  did  not 
seem  disposed  to  advance,  his  illustrious  son  Alexander 
now  changed  positions  with  him,  and  advanced  to  the 
front  as  the  master-spirit  of  the  new  revolution,  deeply 
impressed  with  the  conviction  that  the  hand  of  God 
was  guiding  him  in  a  path  of  duty  and  responsibility 
not  contemplated  by  his  father. 

The  Brush  Run   congregation  continued  to  grow,  by 


176   ALEXANDER  CAMPBELL  ABANDONS  SECTARIANISM. 

frequent  accessions  of  immersed  believers;  and  as  it  had 
been  with  the  church  organized  by  the  llaldanes  at 
Edinburgh,  so  to  this  church,  immersion  became  an  apt 
emblertl  of  separation  from  the  world — a  separation 
from  the  traditions  of  an  apostate  Church,  a  separation 
from  mystic  Babylon.  They  adopted  immersion  as  the 
only  scriptural  mode;  they  rejected  infant  baptism  as  a- 
human  invention,  and  the  simple  confession  that  "Jesus 
is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,"  made  to  Christ  by  the 
first  converts,  was  acknowledged  as  the  only  require- 
ment which  could  be  scripturally  demanded  of  those 
who  desired  to  become  members  of  the  one  body.  All 
these  matters  were  determined  by  the  plain  and  une- 
quivocal authority  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  as,  from  that 
time  to  this,  they  have  continued  to  be  prominent  feat- 
ures in  our  plea  for  a  restoration  of  the  apostolic  order 
of  things.  They  had  now,  indeed,  become  learners  in 
the  school  of  Christ;  and  in  this  respect  they  differed 
widely  from  all  preceding  reformers,  in  the  fact  that, 
instead  of  making  creeds,  re-forming  creeds,  and  re-ad- 
justing creeds,  to  suit  the  changing  times,  and  to  please 
the  changeable  moods  of  men,  they  sought  after  and 
adopted  the  Bible  as  their  only  creed,  and  found  the 
basis  of  Christian  unity  alone  in  the  word  of  God. 
They  proposed  no  patchwork  of  the  divine  order  of 
things,  but,  finally,  so  far  as  Alexander  Campbell  is 
concerned,  a  radical  reformation  was  determined  upon. 
Abandoning  all  creeds,  as  the  outgrowth  of  human 
weakness,  and  as  the  groundwork  of  selfish  sectarian 
rivals,  he  proposed  a  reformation  de  novo — a  reforma- 
tion that  would  eventually  result  in  a  complete  restora- 
tion. And,  hence,  he  instituted  at  once  a  thorough 
research  of  the  entire  grounds  of  Christianity;  and,  by 
his  voluminous  writings,  and  public  debates,  and  by  his 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  177 

matchless  sermons,  repeated  and  published,  he  rescued 
the  Bible  from  the  hands  of  priests  and  hireling  clergy, 
and,  in  defiance  of  the  combined  assaults  of  the  infidel 
world,  placed  Christianity  upon  the  basis  of  authentic- 
ity, credibility  and  inspiration.  He  found  the  plan  of 
salvation  in  the  Scriptures,  and  not  in  a  set  of  cold, 
abstract  propositions;  he  found  a  Savior  in  the  person 
of  Jesus  the  Christ,  and  not  within  the  pale  of  some 
sectarian  church;  he  discovered  that  the  Church  of 
Christ  was  established  in  Jerusalem,  and  not  in  Rome, 
or  at  Augsburg,  or  at  Heidelberg,  or  at  Oxford,  or  at 
Westminster. 


A.  CAMPBELL  TJXITES  WITH  THE  BAPTISTS. 


IN  1813,  as  in  1883,  baptism,  as  taught  by  Baptists, 
was  not  a  command  of  Jesus  Christ,  made  essential  to 
the  salvation  of  a  sinner,  as  one  of  the  conditions  of 
pardon  and  acceptance,  but  it  was  simply  made  a  door 
into  the  "visible  Church" — a  door  into  the  Baptist 
Church.  The  regenerated  sinner — enlightened,  saved 
and  sanctified  by  the  direct,  irresistible  energy  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  without  faith  in  testimony  and  without  obe- 
dience to  the  gospel — first  became  a  member  of  the  "in- 
visible Church"  (whatever  that  is),  and  afterward,  by  a 
vote  of  a  local  Baptist  Church,  he  was  allowed  to  be 
baptized  in  order  that  he  might  have  the  inestimable 
privilege  of  communing  with  Baptists  in  a  visible  Bap- 
tist Church!  On  the  contrary,  A.  Campbell  and  those 
who  worshiped  with  him  in  the  Brush  Run  congrega- 
tion, made  the  discovery,  by  honest  and  candid  investi- 
gation, that  no  one,  under  apostolic  teaching,  was  ever 
received  into  the  one  body — into  a  state  of  salvation  and 
justification — without  immersion  into  the  name  of  the 
Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  They 
discovered  that  it  was  by  "the  obedience  of  the  faith," 
as  well  as  by  faith  in  Jesus  Christ  as  the  Son  of  God, 
that  the  sinner  came  into  covenant  relation  with  God, 
and  that  by  this  transition  act  he  was  conveyed  from 
"the  power  of  darkness  into  the  kingdom  of  God's  dear 
Son."  In  the  Harbinger  for  1848,  page  344,  A.  Camp- 

(178) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  179 

bell  tells  how  he  came  to  unite  with  the  Baptists,  and 
the  circumstances  which  led  to  a  conditional  union  with 
the  Redstone  Baptist  Association.  And  here  is  the  nar- 
rative : 

"After  my  baptism,  and  the  consequent  new  constitu- 
tion of  our  church  of  Brush  Run,  it  became  my  duty  to 
set  forth  the  causes  of  this  change  in  our  position  to  the 
professing  world,  and  also  to  justify  them  by  an  appeal 
to  the  Oracles  of  God.  But  this  was  not  all;  the  posi- 
tion of  baptism  itself  to  the  other  institutions  of  Christ 
became  a  new  subject  of  examination,  and  a  very  ab- 
sorbing one.  A  change  of  one's  views  on  any  radical 
matter,  in  all  its  practical  bearings  and  effects  upon  all 
his  views,  not  only  in  reference  to  that  simple  result, 
but  also  in  reference  to  all  its  connections  with  the  whole 
system  of  which  it  is  a  part,  is  not  to  be  computed,  a 
priori,  by  himself  or  by  any  one  else.  The  whole  Chris- 
tian doctrine  is  exhibited  in  three  symbols — baptism,  the 
Lord's  Supper,  and  the  Lord's  Day  institution.  Some, 
nay,  very  many,  change  their  views  in  regard  to  some 
one  of  these,  without  ever  allowing  themselves  to  trace 
its  connections  with  the  whole  institution  of  which  it  is 
either  a  part  or  a  symbol.  My  mind,  neither  by  nature 
nor  by  education,  was  one  of  that  order.  I  must  know 
now  two  things  about  everything— its  cause  and  its  rela- 
tions. Hence  my  mind  was,  for  a  time,  set  loose  from 
all  its  former  moorings.  It  was  not  a  simple  change  of 
views  on  baptism,  which  happens  a  thousand  times  with- 
out anything  more,  but  a  new  commencement.  I  was 
placed  on  a  new  eminence — a  new  peak  of  the  mountain 
of  God,  from  which  the  whole  landscape  of  Christianity 
presented  itself  to  my  mind  in  a  new  attitude  and  posi- 
tion. 

"I   had  no  idea  of  uniting  with  the  Baptists,  more 


180  A.  CAMPBELL  UNITES  WITH  THE  BAPTISTS. 

than  with  the  Moravians  or  the  mere  Independents.  I 
had  unfortunately  formed  a  very  unfavorable  opinion  of 
the  Baptist  preachers  as  then  introduced  to  my  ac- 
quaintance, as  narrow,  contracted,  illiberal  and  unedu- 
cated men.  This,  indeed,  I. am  sorry  to  say,  is  still  my 
opinion  of  the  ministry  of  that  Association  at  that  day; 
and  whether  they  are  yet  much  improved  I  am  without 
satisfactory  evidence. 

"The  people,  however,  called  Baptists,  were  much 
more  highly  appreciated  by  me  than  their  ministry. 
Indeed,  the  ministry  of  some  sects  is  generally  in  the 
aggregate  the  worse  portion  of  them.  It  was  certainly 
so  in  the  Redstone  Association,  thirty  years  ago.  They 
were  little  men  in  a  bi«:  office.  The  office  did  not  fit 

o 

them.  They  had  a  wrong  idea,  too,  of  what  was  want- 
ing. They  seemed  to  think  that  a  change  of  apparel — 
a  black  coat  instead  of  a  drab — a  broad  rim  on  their  hat 
instead  of  a  narrow  one — a  prolongation  of  the  face  and 
a  fictitious  gravity — a  longer  and  more  emphatic  pro- 
nunciation of  certain  words,  rather  than  Scriptural 
knowledge,  humility,  spirituality,  zeal  and  Christian 
affection,  with  great  devotion  and  great  philanthropy, 
were  the  grand  desiderata. 

"Along  with  these  drawbacks,  they  had  as  few  means 
of  acquiring  Christian  knowledge  as  they  had  either 
taste  or  leisure  for  it.  They  had  but  one, "two,  or,  at 
the  most,  three  sermons,  and  these  were  either  delivered 
in  one  uniform  style  and  order,  or  minced  down  into 
one  medley  by  way  of  variety.  Of  course,  then,  unless 
they  had  an  exuberant  zeal  for  the  truth  as  they  under- 
stood it,  they  were  not  of  the  calibre,  temper  or  attain- 
ments to  relish  or  seek  after  mental  enlargement  or 
independence.  I  .could  not,  therefore,  esteem  them,  nor 
court  their  favor  by  offering  any  incense  at  their  shrine. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  181 

I  resolved  to  have  nothing  especially  to  do  with  them 
more  than  with  other  preachers  and  teachers.  The 
clergy  of  my  acquaintance  in  other  parties  of  that  day 
were,  as  they  believed,  educated  men,  and  called  the 
Baptists  illiterate  and  uncouth  men,  without  either 
learning  or  academic  accomplishments  or  polish.  They 
trusted  to  a  moderate  portion  of  Latin,  Greek  and  met- 
aphysics, together  with  a  synopsis  of  divinity,  ready- 
made  in  suits  for  every  man's  stature,  at  a  reasonable 
price.  They  were  as  proud  of  their  classic  lore  and  the 
marrow  of  modern  divinity,  as  the  Baptist  was  of  his 
'mode  of  baptism,'  and  his  'proper  subject'  with  sover- 
eign grace,  total  depravity,  and  final  perseverance. 

"I  confess,  however,  that  I  was  better  pleased  with 
the  Baptist  people  than  with  any  other  community. 
They  read  the  Bible,  and  seemed  to  care  for  little  else 
in  religion  than  'conversion'  and  'Bible  doctrine.' 
They  often  sent  for  us  and  pressed  us  to  preach  for 
them.  We  visited  some  of  their  churches,  and,  on  ac- 
quaintance, liked  the  people  more  and  the  preachers 
less.  Still  I  feared  that  I  might  be  unreasonable,  and 
by  education  prejudiced  against  them,  and  thought  that 
I  must  visit  their  Association  at  Uniontown,  Pa.,  in  the 
autumn  of  1812.  I  went  there  as  an  auditor  and  spec- 
tator, and  returned  more  disgusted  than  when  I  went. 
They  invited  me  'to  preach,'  but  I  declined  it  alto- 
gether, except  one  evening  in  a  private  family,  to  some 
dozen  preachers  and  twice  as  many  laymen.  I  returned 
home,  not  intending  ever  to  visit  another  Association. 

"On  my  return  home,  however,  I  learned  that  the 
Baptists  themselves  did  not  appreciate  the  preaching-  of 
the  preachers  of  that  meeting.  They  regarded  the 
speakers  as  worse  than  usual,  and  their  discourses  as 
not  edifying — as  too  much  after  the  style  of  John  Gill 


182  A.   CAMPBELL  UNITES  WITH  THE  BAPTISTS. 

and  Tucker's  theory  of  predestination.  They  pressed 
me  from  every  quarter  to  visit  their  churches,  and, 
though  not  a  member,  to  preach  for  them.  I  often 
spoke  to  the  Baptist  congregations  for  sixty  miles 
around.  They  all  pressed  us  to  join  their  Redstone  As- 
sociation. We  laid  the  matter  before  the  Church  in 
the  fall  of  1813.  We  discussed  the  propriety  of  the 
measure.  After  much  discussion  and  earnest  desire  to 
be  directed  by  the  wisdom  which  cometh  from  above, 
we  finally  concluded  to  make  an  overture  to  that  effect, 
and  to  write  out  a  full  view  of  our  sentiments,  wishes 
and  determinations  on  that  subject.  We  did  so  in  some 
eight  or  ten  pages  of  large  dimensions,  exhibiting  our 
remonstrance  against  all  human  creeds  as  bonds  of  com- 
munion or  union  amongst  Christian  churches,  and 
expressing  a  willingness,  upon  certain  conditions,  to  co- 
operate or  unite  with  that  Association,  provided  always 
that  \ve  should  be  allowed  to  teach  and  preach  whatever 
we  learned  from  the  Holy  Scriptures,  regardless  of  any 
creed  or  formula  in  Christendom.  A  copy  of  this  doc- 
ument, we  regret  to  say,  was  not  preserved,  and,  when 
solicited  from  the  clerk  of  the  Association,  was  refused. 
"The  proposition  was  discussed  at  the  Association, 
and,  after  much  debate,  was  decided  by  a  considerable 
majority  in  favor  of  our  being  received.  Thus  a  union 
was  formed.  But  the  party  opposed,  though  small, 
began  early  to  work,  and  continued  with  a  perse- 
verance worthy  of  a  better  cause.  There  was  an 
Elder  Pritchard,  of  Cross  Creek,  Virginia;  an  Elder 
Brownfield,  of  Uniontown,  Penn.;  an  Elder  Stone,  of 
Ohio,  and  his  son  Elder  Stone,  of  the  Monougahela 
region,  that  seemed  to  have  confederated  to  oppose  our 
influence.  But  they,  for  three  years,  could  do  nothing. 
We  boldly  argued  for  the  Bible,  for  the  Xew  Testament 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  183 

Christianity,  vex,  harass,  discompose  whom  it  might. 
We  felt  the  strength  of  our  cause  of  reform  on  every 
indication  of  opposition,  and  constantly  grew  in  favor 
with  the  people.  Things  passed  along  without  any 
prominent  interest  for  some  two  or  three  years." 

The  next  Redstone  Association  convened  at  Cross 
Creek,  August  30,  1816.  A.  Campbell  was  nominated, 
with  others,  as  one  of  the  speakers  for  the  occasion. 
Some  of  the  jealous-minded  ministers  of  the  Association 
opposed  the  nomination,  but  the  opposition  was  over- 
ruled by  other  members  of  that  body.  When  it  came 
Campbell's  turn  to  preach,  he  selected  for  his  topic  the 
following  words,  as  quoted  from  Rom.  viii.  3:  "For 
what  the  law  could  not  do,  in  that  it  was  weak  through 
the  flesh,  God  sending  his  own  Son  in  the  likeness  of 
sinful  flesh,  and  for  sin,  condemned  sin  in  the  ilosh." 
This  was  the  young  polemic's  famous  "  Sermon  on  the 
Law,"  which  subsequently  created  such  wonderful  ex- 
citement in  the  Baptist  community.  It  was  the  sudden 
explosion,  in  the  Baptist  camp,  of  an  apostolic  bomb- 
shell. Even  during  its  delivery,  as  soon  as  Elder 
Pritchard  and  other  opposing  preachers  perceived  its 
drift,  they  used  every  means  openly  to  manifest  their 
disapprobation  A  lady  in  the  congregation  having 
fainted,  Elder  Pritchard  rushed  into  the  stand,  called 
out  some  of  the  preachers,  and  created  great  disturb- 
ance in  the  large  assembly,  apparently  with  a  design  of 
distracting  the  attention  of  the  eager  listeners.  As 
might  be  expected,  much  misrepresentation  followed 
the  delivery  of  this  discourse.  It  was  on  account  of 
these  misrepresentations  that  Mr.  Campbell  thought  it 
best,  soon  afterward,  to  publish  this  revolutionary  ser- 
mon in  pamphlet  form,  as  the  most  effectual  means  of 
refutation.  The  sermon  is  published  in  full  in  the 


184  A.   CAMPBELL  UNITES  WITH  THE  BAPTISTS. 

Millennial  Harbinger  for  1846.  It  is  certainly  a  re- 
markable production,  which  is  too  lengthy  to  reproduce 
upon  these  pages.  His  method  of  analysis  was  as  fol- 
lows: 

1.  Ascertain  what  ideas  we  are  to  attach  to  the  phrase 
"the  law"  in  this  and  similar  portions  of  the  sacred 
Scriptures.  2.  Point  out  those  things  which  the  law 
could  not  accomplish.  3.  Demonstrate  the  reason  why 
the  law  failed  to  accomplish  these  objects.  4.  Illustrate 
how  God  has  remedied  these  relative  defects  of  the  law. 
5.  In  the  last  place,  deduce  such  conclusions  from  these 
premises  as  must  obviously  and  necessarily  present 
themselves  to  every  unbiased  and  reflecting  mind. 

Measured  by  the  Philadelphia  Confession  of  Faith, 
this  sermon,  in  the  estimation  of  those  bigoted  Baptists, 
was  most  unorthodox  and  mischievously  heterodox. 
And  these  clergy  were  the  more  incensed  because  they 
found  themselves  incapable  of  answering  the  points 
taken  in  the  sermon.  The  object  of  the  sermon  was, 
by  contrasting  the  law  of  Moses  with  the  gospel  of 
Christ,  by  contrasting  the  Old  Covenant  with  the  New 
Covenant — by  showing  the  difference  between  "the  let- 
ter that  kills"  and  "the  law  of  the  Spirit"  that  gives 
life — to  convince  his  hearers  that  they  could  not  be 
saved  and  justified  by  any  system  of  things  not  author- 
ized by  Jesus  Christ,  the  Head  of  the  Church,  and  not 
proclaimed  by  his  apostles.  This  sermon  invoked  the 
wrath  of  some  of  the  Baptist  clergy,  and  stirred  up 
vengeful  and  uncompromising  opposition.  Subsequent 
to  the  presentation  of  this  unanswerable  address,  this 
Baptist  Association,  for  several  consecutive  years,  by 
means  of  a  self-constituted  ecclesiastical  court,  brought 
charges  of  heretical  teachings  against  Thomas  and 
Alexander  Campbell.  Whenever  their  persecutors 
failed  to  sustain  the  charge  of  heresy,  they  would 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.    •  185 

attempt  to  tamper  with  the  ignorance  and  prejudices  of 
members  under  their  influence,  and  by  pursuing  this 
unchristian  course  lessen  the  unanimity  of  the  churches 
in  favor  of  the  defendants  in  the  case,  and  increase  the 
chances  of  success  in  their  ultimate  excommunication 
from  the  Baptist  communion.  The  two  Campbells, 
foreseeing  that  it  was  the  fixed  intention  of  their  mis- 
chievous persecutors  to  gain  a  majority  of  votes  in 
favor  of  their  excommunication,  severed  their  connec- 
tion and  withdrew  from  the  Redstone  Baptist  Associa- 
tion, and  united  themselves  with  the  Mahoning  Baptist 
Association,  in  Eastern  Ohio,  and  by  this  step  frustrated 
the  preconcerted  schemes  of  their  malignant  opponents. 
This  Association,  being  much  more,  enlightened  and 
liberal  in  their  views  of  the  truth,  received  the  two  re- 
formers, with  other  delegates  from  the  feeble  churches, 
with  much  cordiality  and  Christian  affection.  This 
Association  received  them  upon  the  Xew  Testament 
platform  alone,  to  the  exclusion  of  all  human  creeds 
and  "church  standards." 
16 


A  SIMILAR  REFORMATION  IN  KENTUCKY. 


AT  the  time  the  Campbells  were  urging  reformation 
in  the  Presbyterian  churches  in  "Western  Pennsylvania, 
there  was  a  movement,  similar  in  character,  going  for- 
ward in  Kentucky,  led  by  Barton  W.  Stone,  a  man  of 
great  intellectual  force  and  possessed  of  rare  zeal  and 
devotion.  Both  Alexander  Campbell  and  B.  W.  Stone 
sought  to  accomplish  the  same  ends  by  the  same  means. 
Both,  almost  simultaneously,  having  discarded  all  hu- 
man creeds,  sought  Christian  union  exclusively  upon 
the  basis  of  the  Bible.  By  comparing  notes,  it  was  dis- 
covered that  both  were  opposed  to  creeds  as  terms  of 
communion ;  that  both  desired  to  propagate  only  the 
primitive  gospel;  that  both  were  alike  persecuted  and 
maligned  by  those  who,  glorying  in  orthodoxy  of  opin- 
ion, failed  to  recognize  a  scriptural  unity  of  faith;  and 
that  both,  after  they  came  to  understand  the  sentiments 
of  each  other,  repudiating  the  despotism  of  opinion- 
ism,  accepted  only  of  faith  that  was  founded  upon  in- 
disputable testimony.  In  Kentucky,  the  adherents  of 
Campbell  were  called  "Reformers,"  while  at  the  same 
time  the  adherents  of  Stone  were  known  as  "  Chris- 
tians," or  "CVms£-iaus."  The  followers  of  Stone  had 
been  charged  with  holding  the  doctrine  of  Arianism, 
hut  by  intercourse  with  Stone  and  others,  Campbell 
discovered  that  the  charges  were  unjust  and  untrue. 
Campbell  advocated  fellowship  with  all  who  received 

(186) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  187 

the  teachings  of  the  Scriptures  in  their  simple  and  ob- 
vious meaning,  and  whose  conduct  corresponded  with 
these  teachings.  He  held  that  there  was  no  need  of 
strained  interpretations,  no  need  of  specious  glosses  or 
textual  perversions  where  no  theological  theory  was  to 
be  sustained,  but  where  all  could  learn  tlie  truth  by  tak- 
ing the  Bible  in  its  proper  connections,  and  construing 
it  in  harmony  with  the  established  laws  of  language  and 
rules  of  interpretation.-  He  held  that  the  simple  truths 
of  the  gospel  could  be  received  by  babes  in  Christ,  and 
that  upon  these  common  truths  all  could  be  united  in 
one  body.  In  short,  the  guiding  principles  of  Camp- 
bell were  substantially  the  same  as  those  which  guided 
the  actions  of  Stone.  Both  were  alike  devoted  to  the 
great  end  of  uniting  the  true  followers  of  Christ  into 
one  communion  upon  the  Bible  alone,  but,  at  first,  each 
regarded  the  method  of  its  accomplishment  from  his  own 
angle  of  vision;  and  since  Campbell  contemplated  the 
distinct  congregations,  with  their  proper  functionaries, 
as  the  highest  religious  executive  authority  on  earth,  he 
was  in  doubt  as  to  how  a,  formal  union  could  be  attained, 
whether  by  a  general  convention  of  messengers  or  by  a 
general  assembly  of  the  people.  Suffice  it  to  say,  that 
the  coalescing  of  the  two  peoples  was  brought  about 
through  the  spirit  of  Christ  and  of  brotherly  love. 

Some  notable  men  fell  into  the  wake  of  the  reform- 
atory movement  of  B.  W.  Stone,  such  as  Samuel  and 
John  Rogers,  Thomas  M.  Allen,  F.  R.  Palmer  and  John 
Allen  Gano — all  grand  characters — and  all  of  whom,  in 
subsequent  years,  distinguished  themselves  as  advocates 
for  a  restoration  of  the  apostolic  order  of  tiling's.  A 
union  of  the  "Christians"  and  "Reformers,"  or  between 
the  "Christian  Church"  and  the  Church  of  the  ''Re- 
formers," was  directly  secured  through  the  agency  of 


188  A  SIMILAR  REFORMATION  IN  KENTUCKY. 

John  T.  Johnson,  a  man  of  rare  self-denial,  a.  man  of 
noble  Christian  integrity,  as  well  as  a  natural  orator. 
Johnson  was  originally  a  Baptist,  but  after  examining 
in  the  light  of  the  Bible  what  was  vulgarly  denominated 
"Campbellism,"  he  separated  from  the  Baptists,  and,  in 
1831,  he  formed  the  nucleus  of  a  congregation  of  six  on 
the  basis  of  the  Bible.  Soon  after  abandoning  the  lu- 
crative practice  of  law,  he  began  the  public  advocacy  of 
the  primitive  gospel.  Becoming  intimately  acquainted 
with  B.  W.  Stone,  who  lived  near  Georgetown,  he  was 
urged  by  the  latter  to  become  co-editor  of  the  Christian 
Messenger,  to  which  he  agreed  at  the  close  of  1831.  This 
paper  was  conducted  in  the  interests  of  Christian  union. 
Johnson  found  that  a  union  in  sentiment  and  religious 
aims  already  existed  between  the  two  peoples  —  the 
"Christians"  and  "Reformers" — to  a  large  extent.  The 
consummation  of  the  union  is  thus  described  by  Prof. 
Richardson  in  his  Memoirs  of  A.  Campbell: 

This  editorial  union  of  B.  W.  Stone  and  John  T. 
Johnson  was  soon  followed  by  a  fraternal  union  between 
the  "Christian"  Church  and  that  of  the  "Reformers" 
meeting  in  Georgetown.  Agreeing  to  worship  together, 
they  found  so  much  agreement  in  all  essential  matters,  and 
so  happy  an  effect  produced  in  the  increased  number  of 
conversions,  that  they  were  induced  near  the  close  of  1831 
to  appoint  a  general  meeting  at  Georgetown  to  continue 
four  days,  for  the  purpose  of  considering  the  subject  of 
a  complete  union  between  the  two  people.  This  meet- 
ing included  Christmas  Day,  and  a  similar  one  was  ap- 
pointed for  the  following  week,  including  Kew  Year's 
Day,  at  Lexington.  Many  of  the  leading  preachers  on 
both  sides  attended  and  took  part  in  these  meetings,  and 
so  much  evidence  was  afforded  of  mutual  Christian  love 
and  confidence,  and  such  undoubted  assurances  were 
given  of  a  firm  determination  on  the  part  of  all  to  have 
nothing  to  do  with  doctrinal  speculations,  but  to  accept 
as  conclusive  upon  all  subjects  the  simple  teachings  of 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  189 

the  Bible,  that  there  seemed  to  be  no  longer  anything 
in  the  way- of  the  most  earnest  and  hearty  co-operation. 
After  the  meeting  at  Lexington,  some  further  friendly 
conferences  were  held  by  means  of  committees,  and,  by 
arrangement,  the  members  of  both  churches  communed 
together  on  the  19th  of  February,  •agreeing  to  consum- 
mate the  formal  and  public  union  of  the  two  churches 
on  the  following  Lord's  Day,  the  26th.  During  the 
week,  however,  some  began  to  fear  a  difficulty  in  rela- 
tion to  the  choice  of  elders  and  the  practical  adoption 
of  weekly  communion,  which  they  thought  would  re- 
quire the  constant  presence  of  an  ordained  administra- 
tor. The  person  who  generally  ministered  to  the  Chris- 
tian Church  at  Lexington  at  this  time  was  Thomas 
Smith,  a  man  of  more  than  ordinary  abilities  and  at- 
tainments, and  long  associated  with  the  movement  of  B. 
W.  Stone.  He  was  an  excellent  preacher,  and  was  con- 
sidered a  skillful  debater.  He  possessed  withal  a  very 
amiable  disposition,  and  was  highly  esteemed  by  Mr. 
Campbell,  whom  he  often  accompanied  during  his  visits 
in  Kentucky.  He  was  at  first,  like  others,  apprehensive 
that  the  proposed  union  was  premature,  and  that  dis- 
agreement might  arise  in  regard  to  questions  of  church 
order.  The  union  was  therefore  postponed,  and  matters 
remained  for  a  short  time  stationary;  but  it  soon  be- 
came generally  apparent  that  there  were  no  exclusive 
privileges  belonging  to  preachers  as  it  concerned  the  ad- 
ministration of  ordinances,  and  Thomas  M.  Allen  com- 
ing to  Lexington,  induced  them  to  complete  the  union 
and  to  transfer  to  the  new  congregation,  thus  formed 
under  the  title  of  "the  Church  of  Christ,"  the  comfort- 
able meeting-house  which  they  had  previously  held 
under  the  designation  of  "the  Christian  Church."  This 
wise  measure  secured  entire  unanimity,  and  was  espe- 
cially gratifying  to  the  "Reformers,"  who  had  been 
meeting  in  a  rented  building.  At  Paris,  also,  Mr.  Allen 
succeeded  in  effecting  a  union  between  the  two  churches, 
foi  one  of  which  he  had  himself  been  preaching,  while 
James  Challen  at  this  time  ministered  to  the  other.  He 
proposed  that  both  he  and  Mr.  Challen  should  retire, 


190  A  SIMILAR  REFORMATION  IN  KENTUCKY. 

and  that  the  united  churches  should  engage  permanently 
the  services  of  Aylette  Raines.  This  was  accordingly 
done,  and  Mr.  Raines,  leaving  his  field  in  Ohio,  from 
this  time  continued  to  preach  for  the  church  at  Paris, 
as  well  as  for  other  churches  in  Kentucky,-  for  more  than 
twenty  years,  aiding  besides  in  numerous  protracted 
meetings,  and  by  his  steady,  unremitting  labors  and 
able  advocacy  of  the  Reformation  principles  greatly  ex- 
tending their  influence." — Menwirs  of  A.  Campbell,  pp. 
383-85. 

There  were  present  at  the  Lexington  Conference :  B. 
W.  Stone,  John  F.  Johnson,  John  (Raccoon)  Smith, 
John  Rogers,  G.  W.  Elley  and  Jacob  Creath,  Jr. — all 
notable  men.  The  adherents  of  Stone  did  not  all  follow 
him,  and  some  of  his  brethren  censured  him  for  the 
course  he  had  pursued.  However,  in  the  course  of  time, 
the  great  majority  were  absorbed  in  the  common  plea 
for  Christian  union.  B.  W.  Stone  had  been  raised  a 
Presbyterian.  He  began  his  plea  for  Christian  union 
upon  the  basis  of  the  Bible  in  1804,  eight  years  before 
Alexander  Campbell  was  immersed. 

It  is  a  noteworthy  fact  that  at  the  very  time  when 
these  events  were  transpiring  in  Kentucky,  the  same 
spirit  of  union  was  prevailing  over  sectarianism  and 
bigotry  and  prejudice  in  other  States  also.  John  Long- 
ley,  of  Rush  County,  Indiana,  under  date  of  the  24th  of 
December,  1831,  says: 

The  Reforming  Baptists  and  we  are  all  one  here.  We 
hope  that  the  dispute  between  you  and  Bro.  Campbell, 
about  names  and  priority,  will  forever  cease,  and  that  you 
will  go  on,  united,  to  reform  the  world. 

Griffith  Cathey,  of  Tennessee,  on  the  4th  of  January, 
1832,  writes  substantially  as  follows  : 

The  members  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  and  the  mem- 
bers known  by  the  name  of  Disciples,  or  Reformed 
Baptists,  regardless  of  all  charges  about  Trinitarianism, 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  191 

Arianism  and  Socinianism,  and  of  the  questions  whether 
it  is  possible  for  any  person  to  get  to  heaven  without 
immersion,  or  whether  immersion  is  for  the  remission 
of  sins,  have  come  forward,  given  the  right  hand  of  fel- 
lowship, and  united  upon  the  plain  and  simple  gospel. 

Alexander  Campbell,  by  his  commanding  talents,  by 
his  great  force  of  character  and  by  his  invincible  cour- 
age, overshadowed  all  other  reformers,  and  at  once,  by 
common  consent  of  all  parties,  became  the  acknowl- 
edged champion — the  admired  leader — of  the  great  on- 
slaught upon  the  sectarian  world.  B.  W.  Stone  died  at 
the  age  of  eighty-four,  after  having  spent  his  life  in 
laboring  incessantly  for  the  union  of  God's  people.  He 
was  a  grand  character,  a  man  of  noble  instincts,  of  su- 
perior intelligence,  and  greatly  loved  and  admired  for 
his  unselfish  and  philanthropic  devotion  to  the  cause  of 
Christ.  He  lives  in  history  as  one  of  the  most  distin- 
guished factors  in  the  greatest  religious  revolution  of 
modern  times. 


THE  CHURCH  OF  CHRIST  IDENTIFIED. 


BY  degrees  the  Baptist  Mahoning  Association  lost  its 
legislative  and  ecclesiastical  character,  under  the  reforma- 
tory movements  of  the  Campbells  and  their  coadjutors, 
and  the  ministers  of  a  free  people,  heretofore  living  under 
the  influence  of  this  Association,  gradually  lost  their  affec- 
tion for  human  tradition  and  theological  speculations, 
which  had  been  made  tests  of  Christian  fellowship;  so 
that,  in  doe  course  of  time,  by  learning  how  to  use  the 
rules  of  Bible  interpretation — how  to  quote  and  apply 
Scriptures — how  to  distinguish  the  law  from  the  gospel 
— how  to  distinguish  the  Jewish  from  the  Christian  dis- 
pensation, and  the  Patriarchal  from  the  Jewish — this 
Association  entirely  lost  its  distinctive  ecclesiastical 
features,  and  was  finally  absorbed  by  the  "Big  Meet- 
ings" of  the  "Western  Reserve." 

It  never  was  in  the  mind  of  either  Thomas  or  Alex- 
ander Campbell  to  start  a  new  sect;  indeed,  as  we  have 
already  shown,  they  disclaimed  and  abhorred  the  very 
ideu;  they  simply  sought  reformation  within  their  own 
ranks,  as  did  the  reformers  of  the  three  preceding  cen- 
turies. But  now,  under  the  guidance  of  a  gracious 
Providence,  having  broken  away  from  all  traditional 
trammels — the  principles  of  the  "Declaration  and  Ad- 
dress" pushing  them  to  the  front  by  logical  necessity — 
having  escaped  the  clerical  yoke  of  spiritual  bondage — 
and  having  accepted  the  Bible  as  their  only  safe  and  in- 
fallible guide,  and  acknowledging  Jesus  the  Christ  as 
their  only  infallible  lawmaker  and  legislator,  these  illus- 

(192) 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  193 

trious  reformers,  with  other  mighty  men  of  influence 
and  eloquence,  from  the  Protestant  denominations,  from 
this  time  forward  began  to  advocate,  not  simply  church 
reformation — which  was  all  that  the  earlier  reformers 
sought  to  accomplish — but  an  entire  restoration  of  the 
apostolic  order  of  things.  They  now  resolved  to  go  back 
beyond  Philadelphia,  beyond  Oxford,  beyond  Westmin- 
ster, beyond  Geneva,  beyond  Augsburg,  beyond  Heidel- 
berg, beyond  Rome,  and  back  to  Jerusalem,  and  there 
begin  a  new  survey  of  the  great  domain,  of  apostolic 
Christianity.  Accordingly,  it  was  not  long  until  the 
Christian  Baptist,  and  other  contemporaneous  periodi- 
cals, were  started  to  advocate  this  plea;  a  Bible  college 
was  organized  in  the  interest  of  this  plea;  a  host  of  elo- 
quent preachers  entered  body  and  soul  into  the  work, 
and,  as  a  consequence,  converts  from  the  world  and 
from  sectariandom  were  made  by  thousands. 

If  Martin  Luther  wrested  the  Bible  out  of  the  hands 
of  the  Roman  priesthood,  and  gave  it  to  the  people — 
which  had  been  a  sealed  book  to  the  masses — Alexan- 
der Campbell  did  a  mightier  work  by  wresting  from  the 
hands  of  the  Papal  and  Protestant  clergy  false  keys  of 
Bible  interpretation,  while  at  the  same  time  he  restored 
to  the  people  the  only  correct  and  approved  rules  of  in- 
terpretation, which,  without  the  aid  of  the  private  and 
mystic  explanations  of  especially  "called  and  sent 
preachers,"  would  enable  them  to  understand  the  Word 
of  God  for  themselves.  He  taught  the  people  how  to 
read  the  Scriptures  intelligently,  and  how  to  "accu- 
rately divide  the  word  of  truth."  He  showed  how 
necessary  it  is  to  know  where,  a  thing  was  done,  when  it 
was  done,  how  it  was  done,  and  by  whom  it  was  doncj; 
whether  the  person  speaking  was  a  Jew  or  a  Christian; 
whether  the  persons  addressed  were  saints  or  sinners; 
17 


194  THE  CHURCH  OF  CHRIST  IDENTIFIED. 

whether  under  the  Old  Covenant,  or  under  the  New 
Covenant;  whether  the  speakers  were  discussing  the 
law,  or  the  gospel;  whether  those  who  wrote  had  refer- 
ence to  the  Church  of  Christ,  or  to  the  "church  that 
was  set  up  in  the  wilderness"  by  Moses;  or  whether 
the  gospel  in  fact  was  first  preached  by  Abraham,  or  by 
the  apostles  of  Jesus  Christ;  or  whether  the  law  of  par- 
don, in  relation  to  the  sinner,  emanated  from  Moses,  a 
fallible  man,  or  from  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  the  divine  Son 
of  God. 

Following  the  motto  that  "where  the  Bible  speaks,  we 
speak;  where  the  Bible  is  silent,  we  are  silent"  Alexander 
Campbell,  both  in  preaching  and  writing,  showed  the 
difference  between  facts  and  opinions — between  per- 
sonal knowledge — the  knowledge  of  the  senses — and 
faith  founded  on  testimony.  He  utterly  repudiated  the 
idea  that  the  opinions  of  men  should  be  made  tests  of 
Christian  fellowship.  These  he  regarded  as  only  pri- 
vate property,  and  that,  as  such,  they  should  be  always^ 
held  in  abeyance,  and  never  be  intruded  into  the  do- 
main of  fact  and  faith.  He  simplified  the  whole  matter 
by  showing  that  facts  are  to  be  believed,  commands  to 
be  obeyed,  and  the  promises  of  the  gospel  to  be  enjoyed. 
The  commonest  mind  could  apprehend  these  simple  but 
grand  divisions  of  the  scheme  of  redemption. 

He  showed  that  the  plan  of  salvation  was  a  divine 
and  sublime  and  glorious  unity — that  there  is  "one 
Lord,  one  faith,  and  one  baptism,"  and  that11  the  doc- 
trine of  Christ"  is  a  proposition  altogether  different 
from  the  "doctrines  of  men,"  and  from  the  "doctrines 
of  demons. "  He  contended — and  his  arguments  remain 
unassailable  to  the  present  day — that  the  Bible,  and  the 
Bible  only,  can  be  made  the  basis  of  Christian  unity, 
and  that  no  unity,  either  in  form  or  in  spirit,  can  ever 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  195 

take  place  until  all  creeds,  Confessions  of  Faith, 
"Church  Standards,"  and  denominational  titles — such 
as  Episcopal,  Lutheran,  Presbyterian,  Baptist,  Metho- 
dist and  Roman  Catholic — shall  be  removed  out  of  the 
way.  All  these  are  divisive  of  the  "one  body,"  of 
which  body  Christ  is  the  one  living  and  all-animating 
Head. 

Campbell  insisted  that  Bible  things  should  be  inculca- 
ted in  Bible  words,  that  all  theological  terminologies 
should  be  abandoned,  and  that  the  nomenclature  of 
scholastic  schools  should  be  rejected,  as  only  serving  to 
confuse  and  discourage  "the  common  people  who  gladly 
hear  the  word,"  and  who  can  not  comprehend  meta- 
physics, theological  abstractions,  and  inferential  deduc- 
tions. He  taught — as  do  the  "Disciples  of  Christ" 
now  uniformly — that  "the  gospel  is  the  power  of  God 
unto  salvation,  and  that  God  has  revealed  no  power 
above  and  beyond  the  gospel,  as  essential  to  enlighten- 
ment and  conviction  of  sin.  lie  did  not  limit  the 
power  of  the  Spirit,  but  he  maintained  that  we  have  no 
right  to  pry  into  mysteries  which  the  Almighty  Father 
has  not  revealed.  "Secret  things  belong  to  God,  but 
revealed  things  to  us  and  our  children." 

He  taught  that  the  revealed  promises  of  God  are  the 
only  evidences  of  pardon  in  our  possession,  and  while 
relying  implicitly  and  unequivocally  upon  the  Word  of 
God,  he  rejected  all  sensuous  evidence  of  pardon,  such 
as  psychological  impressions,  dreams,  apparitions,  su- 
pernatural visitations,  ecstasies:  all  of  which  supersti- 
tious notions  were  prevailing  at  the  time  when — 
seventy  years  ago — the  Campbells  proposed  to  abandon 
the  sectarian  world  and  return  to  the  Bible  and  apostolic 
teaching.  Of  course,  as  a  consequence  of  the  principles 
which  they  adopted,  they  could  do  no  other  than  throw 


ItiG  THE  CHURCH  OT  CHKIST  IDENTIFIED. 

overboard,  as  lumber  of  the  mystical  and  monkish  ages, 
all  speculative  theories  of  conversion — the  doctrine  of 
direct  supernatural  agency — and  show,  by  apostolic 
teaching,  that  it  is  the  moral  power  of  divine  truth,  as 
exerted  through  the  gospel,  that  changes  the  moral 
nature  of  man. 

By  an  appeal  to  the  New  Testament,  they  showed 
that  the  working  of  miracles,  by  the  apostles,  was  de- 
signed as  a  "confirmation  of  the  word,"  as  revealed  by 
the  Holy  Spirit,  but  that  in  no  place  is  it  recorded  that 
a  miracle  ever  changed  the  heart  of  a  sinner.  "  Signs,'' 
says  Paul,  "are  not  for  them  that  believe,  but  for  them 
that  believe  not.'1  The  sinner  is  saved  by  faith  in  Jesus 
the  Christ,  and  by  obedience  to  the  conditions  of  the 
gospel. 

Giving  up  infant  baptism,  while  they  were  yet  Pres- 
byterians in  name,  by  a  direct  course,  through  Bible  in- 
vestigation, they  came  to  that  point,  where,  in  the 
absence  of  all  testimony,  they  were  obliged  to  surrender 
both  rantism  and  affusion,  as  being  without  the  least 
authority  in  the  Word  of  God. 

While  accepting  all  the  measures  of  reform  as  accom- 
plished by  Luther,  Zwingle,  Calvin,  Melancthon,  John 
"Wesley  and  Roger  Williams,  which  were  accomplished 
in  harmony  with  the  inspired  Scriptures,  Alexander 
Campbell,  and  those  royal  spirits  co-operating  with 
him,  laid  aside  as  impracticable  all  the  theological  spec- 
ulations and  false  dogmas  of  those  reformers,  with  all 
their  contradictory  deductions  from  human  reason,  un- 
supported by  a  "Thus  saith  the  Lord." 

Having  fully  committed  himself  to  a  "Restoration  of 
the  Ancient  Order  of  Things,"  Alexander  Campbell  en- 
countered, in  the  outset,  three  popular  systems  of 
denominational  justification,  all  of  which,  while  being 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  197 

essentially  the  same  in  principle,  flatly  contradict  the 
Word  of  God.  These  were  Calvinism,  Arminianism 
and  Universalism.  The  central  idea  of  the  first  is  this : 
That  God  had  from  all  eternity  decreed  the  salvation  of 
his  own  elect  few,  whose  number  can  neither  be  in- 
creased nor  diminished,  while  condemning  all  the  rest 
of  mankind  to  eternal  reprobation.  And  further,  that 
man  beiug  totally  depraved,  and  incapable  of  any  voli- 
tion toward  good  thoughts  or  good  deeds,  can  only  be 
renewed  in  life  by  the  irresistible  grace  of  God.  The 
second  theory  embraces  this  idea:  That,  as  it  is  impos- 
sible for  man  to  repent  of  his  sins,  until  he  receives  the 
gift  of  faith  direct  from  heaven,  he  must  remain  in  his 
sins  until  God,  in  his  own  good  time,  sends  down  the 
Holy  Spirit  to  regenerate  him.  Man  can  do  nothing. 
God  must  do  all;  man  must  wait,  and  if  God  chooses 
not  to  visit  him,  he  is  lost.  The  third  theory  is  to  this 
eflect:  That  God  has  from  all  eternity  decreed  the  sal- 
vation of  all  men,  and  that  all  men,  without  the  loss  of 
one  soul,  will  be  made  finally  holy  and  happy.  Take 
either  one  of  these  systems,  and  it  is  clear  to  be  seen 
that  man  has  nothing  at  all  to  do  in  securing  his  own 
salvation — that  his  salvation  or  condemnation  is  wholly 
in  the  hands  of  a  stern  and  implacable  God;  that  salva- 
tion is  entirely  unconditional;  that  man  is  wholl}'  and 
helplessly  passive,  and  therefore  irresponsible.  Campbell 
held  that  if  these  systems  are  in  harmony  with  the  moral 
government  of  God,  then  is  man  not  a  free  moral  agent- 
that  there  is  no  virtue  in  preaching  the  gospel;  that 
there  is  no  need  of  a  Mediator,  and  that  a  remedial 
scheme  is  a  superfluity,  if  not  an  absolute  myth. 

The  effects  of  the  religious  revolution  inaugurated  by 
the  Campbells  were  not  foreseen  by  them  and  their  co- 
adjutors. Their  steps  evidently  were  guided  by  the 


198  THE  CHURCH  OF  CHRIST  IDENTIFIED. 

providence  of  God;  and  now  there  is  not  a  pulpit  or  a 
religious  journal  in  the  land,  that  has  not  either  directly 
or  indirectly  been  influenced  by  the  plea  of  those  godly 
men,  to  reject  many  of  the  grosser  forms  of  a  perverted 
Christianity.  On  the  question  of  Christian  union — 
toward  the  consummation  of  which  grand  object  Alex- 
ander Campbell  gave  the  undivided  energies  of  his 
eventful  life — there  is  now  a  rapidly-growing  sentiment 
among  all  good  men  in  the  various  denominations. 
Campbell  held  that  all  denominations  never  could  unite 
as  one  spiritual  body — neither  as  Presbyterians,  nor  as 
Episcopalians,  nor  as  Lutherans,  nor  as  Methodists,  nor 
as  Baptists,  nor  upon  any  other  sectarian  name;  but 
that  they  could  unite  as  Christians,  that  being  designa- 
ted as  the  scriptural  name  of  the  followers  of  Christ, 
the  "Founder  of  the  Church.  He  held  that  all  these 
church  titles  were  of  purely  human  origin,  that  they 
tended  continually  toward  carnality  and  the  seculariza- 
tion of  divine  things,  and  that  as  central  ideas  of  church 
polities — each  polity  antagonizing  every  other  polity — 
they  contradict  the  last  intercessory  prayer  of  our  Sav- 
ior, who  prayed  that  all  his  disciples  might  be  of  one 
mind  and  heart;  that  as  he  and  his  Father  are  one,  so 
his  disciples  might  be  one  with  them,  that  the  world 
might  believe  that  he  is  the  Messiah — Christ  himself 
representing  the  one  true  vine,  and  his  disciples  the 
branches,  which  fact  forever  excludes  the  idea  that  de- 
nominations constitute  "branches"  of  the  "one  body." 
When  Christ  said,  "Upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my 
Church,"  the  conception  of  a  Papal  or  Protestant 
Church,  or  a  Gallican  or  Anglican  Church,  was  not 
present  in  his  mind.  So  many  diverse  bodies  can  not 
possibly  possess  the  Spirit  of  Christ.  The  spirit  of  man 
is  in  them,  and  hence  they  can  not  be  divine. 


THE  RESTORATION"  OF  APOSTOLIC  CHRIS- 
TIANITY. 


IN  closing  our  series  of  articles  on  Reformatory  Move- 
ments, we  propose  to  give  the  results  of  the  religious 
revolution  as  inaugurated  by  Alexander  Campbell. 

It  has  been  made  evident  by  the  numerous  facts  which 
we  have  heretofore  narrated,  that  Campbell  worked  him- 
self out  of  spiritual  Babylon  by  a  thorough  investiga- 
tion of  the  Scriptures,  and  that  he  abandoned  all  Prot- 
estant sects  because  he  could  not  find  the  basis  of 
Christian  union  in  any  one  of  them.  lie  faithfully 
followed  the  logic  of  God's  Word  to  the  end.  He  dis- 
carded the  deductions  of  human  reason  as  a  logical  ne- 
cessity, and  settled  all  controversies  by  a  direct  appeal  to 
the  law  and  authority  of  Jesus  the  Christ.  He  estab- 
lished the  proposition  that  Jesus  Christ  is  the  only  be- 
gotten Son  of  God,  by  the  most  majestic  and  incontro- 
vertible arguments  that  were  ever  penned  by  mortal 
man.  His  arguments  on  the  divinity  of  Christ  stand 
before  the  world  without  a  parallel.  His  theses  on  the 
Person  of  Christ,  as  Prophet,  Priest  and  King,  and  as 
the  only  Savior  of  men,  and  as  the  only  hope  of  the 
world,  have  never  been  excelled.  He  showed  that  sal- 
vation from  sin  is  not  in  subscription  to  creeds  or  dog- 
mas; not  in  joining  some  orthodox  Church ;  not  in  in. 
dorsing  the  opinions  of  men,  however  hoary  with  age; 

(199) 


200        THE  RESTORATION  OP  APOSTOLIC  CHRISTIANITY. 

but  in  a  person,  in  the  Person  of  Christ :  that  f  all  the 
promises  of  God  are  in  him  yea,  and  in  him  amen." 

The  ground   of  assurance  we   occupy  may  now  be 
briefly  stated : 

I.  Our  creed  is  the  Inspired  Word  of  God;  no  more, 
no  less. 

II.  We  believe  with  all  the  heart  that  the  Word  of 
God — the  Plan  of  Salvation — was  miraculously  revealed 
by  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  that  the  revealed  word  was 
confirmed  by  miraculous  attestations  of  divine  power. 

III.  We  believe  that  the  gospel — which  consists  of 
the  death,  burial  and  resurrection  of  Christ — is  the  power 
of  God  unto  salvation  to  every  one  who  believes  it  and 
obeys  it. 

IV.  Accepting  of  no  theory  of  regeneration,  and  dis- 
carding alike  all  mystical  influences  and  all  scholastic 
vagaries,  we  believe  that  sinners  \\ho  are  brought  under 
the  power  of  the  truth,  are  begotten  of  the  Word  of  God 
— are  begotten  through  the  gospel — are  made  alive  by  the 
truth,  and  born  of  water. 

V.  We  believe  that  immersion,  preceded  by  genuine 
faith  in  Jesus  Christ  as  the  Savior  of  men,  and  preceded 
by  genuine  repentance  toward  God,  is,  if  done  in  the 
name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Sou,  and  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  for  the  remission  of  past  sins,  and  that  it  is  the 
consummating  act  in  the  divine  process  of  salvation. 

VI.  Taking  the  Scriptures  as  our  infallible  guide  in 
all  spiritual  things,  we  believe  that  the  heart  of  tlie  sin- 
ner is  changed  by  the  truth  contained  in  the  Scriptures, 
and  that  it  is  the  moral  power  of  God  found  in  the  di- 
vine testimonies,  which,  when  brought  to  bear  upon  the 
sinner's  heart,  changes  his  moral  nature,  and  makes  him 
a  "new  creature"  in  Christ  Jesus.     We  believe  that  the 
truth,  as  revealed  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  was  intended  bv 


KEFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  201 

the  heavenly  Father  to  "convince  the  world  of  sin,  of 
righteousness,  and  of  judgment  to  come;"  that  in  con- 
version, the  Holy  Spirit  is  the  agent,  and  the  word  re- 
vealed L>v  the  Spirit  the  instrument.  We  believe  that  it 

«/  i. 

is  the  Word  of  God,  wielded  by  the  Spirit,  that  does  the 
execution,  and  that  it  is  the  Word  of  God,  as  the  sword 
of  the  Spirit,  that  slays  the  sinner  and  destroys  his  love 
of  sin.  As  we  do  not  believe  in  the  efficacy  of  the  word 
without  the  presence  of  tht  Spirit,  neither  do  we  believe 
in  a  direct  mystical  operation  of  the  Spirit  without  the 
presence  of  the  word  in  the  sinner's  heart. 

VII.  We  believe  that  the  act  of  pardon  takes  place 
in  the  mind  of  God,  and  not  in  the  sinner's  heart;  and 
we  know  this  to  be  so,  because  the  conditions  of  pardon 
are  found  recorded  in  the  revealed  will  of  God.     We 
do  not  believe  that  a  sinner — by  the  mere  testimony  of 
\\hfeelings — has  a  personal  consciousness  of  the  pardon 
of  his  sins.     Remission  of  sins  is  purely  a  matter  of 
faith  in  the  promises  of  God,  and  not  a  mere  matter  of 
conscious  feeling,  as  produced  by  a  psychological  state  of 
heart  or  affections.     It  is  the  love  of  God  that  changes 
the  sinner's  heart,  and  it  is  the  truth  that  convicts  the 
sinner  of  sin;    and  it  is  God  who  remits  sin  through 
obedience  to  the  gospel.     Of  course,  we  here  only  pro- 
pose to  give  statements,  not  arguments. 

VIII.  We  do  not  pretend  to  limit  the  power  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  but,  in  the  absence  of  testimony,  we  can 
not  believe  that  there  is  a  superadded  power,  beyond 
and  apart  from  the  gospel,  necessary  to  the  conviction 
of  the  sinner.     Such  a  speculation  was  never  even  hint- 
ed at  by  Christ  and  his  apostles.     In  all  doctrinal  mat- 
ters,   and  in  ail   questions  of  commands   and   personal 
obedience,  "where   the    Bible    speaks,  we    speak;    and 
where  the  Bible  is  silent,  we  are  silent."    We  are,  there- 


202        THE  RESTORATION  OF  APOSTOLIC  CHRISTIANITY. 

fore,  as  much  bound  to  respect  the  silence  of  the  Bible, 
as  we  are  bound  to  honor  its  utterances. 

IX.  We  believe   that   God   only  acknowledges  one 
body  of  believers,  and  that  all  converted  men,  in  order 
to  become  members  of  the  one  body  of  Christ,  must,  by 
the  teachings  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  be  "immersed  into  the 
one  body."    We  designate  the  one  body,  of  which  Christ 
is  the  one  all-animating  Head,  the  Church  of  Christ, 
because  the  body  is  constituted  of  those  who  believe  in 
Christ,  obey  Christ,  and  walk  in  Christ.     We  call  our- 
selves Christians,  because  Christ  is  our  only  King  and 
lawgiver,  and  him  only  do  we  propose  to  follow.     We 
call  ourselves  the  Disciples  of  Christ,  because  we  learn 
only  from  Christ  and  his  apostles. 

X.  In  church  edification,  in  worship,  in  disciplinary 
matters,  and  in   the   weekly  communion,  we  take  the 
New  Testament  as  our  only  rule  of  faith  and  practice. 

There  are  some  things  we  do  not  believe,  because  not 
authorized  and  sustained  by  the  Word  of  God. 

1.  We  do  not  believe  in  sectarian  churches,  nor  in 
Protestant  denominationalism,  nor  in  the  Roman  Cath- 
olic Church,  or  any  other  Church  that  has  an  existence 
without  the  sanction  of  God's  Word. 

2.  We  do  not  believe  in  human  creeds,  in  speculative 
dogmas,  in  theories  of  regeneration,  in  the  mourning- 
bench  business,  in  dreams  and  apparitions,  in  phantasies 
and  ecstasies,  nor  in  sensuous  feelings,  as  guides  in  the 
way  of  obedience  and  of  a  divine  life. 

3.  We  do  not  believe  in  a  direct,  special,  irresistible 
theory  of  regeneration. 

4.  We  do  not  believe  in  infant  baptism,  nor  in  affu- 
sion, nor  rantism.     We  have  good  reason  to  believe  that 
they  originated  in  an  apostate  Church. 

5.  We  do  not  believe  in  a  Roman  Church,  nor  in  an 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  203 

Episcopal  Church,  iior  in  a  Lutheran  Church,  nor  in  a 
Presbyterian  Church,  nor  in  a  Paptist  Church,  nor  in  a 
Methodist  Church,  nor  in  any  other  Church,  not  known 
in  the  apostolic  age.  We  do  not  believe  in  any  human 
organization  as  a  substitute  for  the  Church  of  the  living 
God. 

6.  We  do  not  believe  that  persons  who  have  never 
been  immersed  into  Jesus  Christ  —  into  the  death  of 
Christ — into  the  one  body — are  members  of  the  one 
body. 

7.  We  do  not  believe  that  morality,  no  matter  how 
high  its  character  or  how  highly  prized  by  men,  will 
save  a  soul  from  eternal  death,  without  the  righteous- 
ness of  Christ,  and  without  the  righteousness  of  God. 

8.  We  do  not  believe  that  God  will  save  men  by  faith 
alone,  or  by  repentance  alone,  or  by  baptism  alone,  or 
by  grace  alone,  or  by  works  alone.     We  believe  that 
God  will  save  men  who  sustain  the  relation  of  a  Chris- 
tian, and  who  have  the  character  of  a  Christian.     This 
is  inclusive  of  all  possible  good. 

9.  We  do  not  believe  in  a  Papal  form  <5f  church  gov- 
ernment, nor  in  an  Episcopal  form  of  church  govern- 
ment, nor  in  a  Presbyterial  form  of  church  government; 
but  we  do  believe  in  the  independency  of  every  congre- 
gation, as  regards  church  government,  and  in  the  sov- 
ereign right  of  every  congregation  to  choose  its  own 
officers,  such  as  elders  and  deacons.     We  also  believe 
that  while  the  congregations  maintain  a  separate  gov- 
ernmental independency,  they  are  at  the  same  time  spir- 
itually and  sympathetically  united  in  Christ  as  one  har- 
monious body,  and  that  they  are  mutually  bound  to 
co-operate  in  the  accomplishment  of  the  same  grand 
objects,  especially  in  proclaiming  the  glad  tidings  of 


204        THE  RESTORATION  OF  APOSTOLIC  CHRISTIANITY. 

salvation  aud  establishing  congregations  according  to 
the  apostolic  model. 

What  we  have  no\v  mapped  out  as  the  ground  we 
occupy,  we  are  thoroughly  convinced  is  truly  the  apos- 
tolic ground,  and  a  ground  of  unity  about  which  there 
can  be  no  intelligent  controversy.  The  ground  we  oc- 
cupy excludes  all  sectarianism.  All  the  people  of  God 
may  occupy  this  ground.  We  invite  all  men  to  receive 
the  same  Bible  we  receive;  to  accept  the  same  creed  we 
accept;  to  honor  the  same  Lord  we  honor;  to  obey  the 
same  gospel  we  obey;- to  bear  the  same  scriptural  titles 
we  bear;  to  "walk  by  the  same  rules,"  to  "mind  the 
same  things,"  to  "speak  the  same  things,"  to  be  "joined 
together  in  the  same  judgment,"  to  contend  earnestly 
for  the  same  faith. 


HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 


MANY  writers,  Protestant  as  well  as  Romanist,  hare 
regarded  the  assembly  of  the  apostles  and  elders  of 
Jerusalem,  of  which  \ve  read  in  Acts  xv.,  as  the  first 
ecclesiastical  council,  and  the  model  on  which  others 
were  formed,  in  accordance,  as  they  suppose,  with  a 
divine  command  or  apostolic  institution.  But  this  view 
of  the  subject  is  unsupported  by  the  testimony  of  the 
apostolic  times,  and  is  at  variance  with  the  opinions  of 
the  earliest  writers,  who  refer  to  the  councils  of  the 
Church.  Tertullian  speaks  of  the  ecclesiastical  assem- 
blies of  the  Asiatic  and  European  Greeks  as  a  human 
institution;  and  in  a  letter  written  by  Firmilian,  Bishop 
of  Ceesarea,  to  Cyprian,  about  the  middle  of  the  third 
century,  the  same  custom  is  referred  to  merely  as  a  con- 
venient arrangement  existing  at  that  time  among  the 
churches  of  Asia  Minor  for  common  deliberation  on 
matters  of  extraordinary  importance.  Besides  this,  it 
will  be  discovered,  upon  examination,  that  the  councils 
of  the  Church  were  assemblages  of  altogether  a  differ- 
ent nature  from  that  of  the  apostles;  the  only  point  in 
which  the  alleged  model  was  really  imitated  being,  per- 
haps, the  form  of  the  preface  to  the  decree,  "  It  has 
seemed  good  to  the  Holy  Spirit  and  to  us."  (Studicn  u. 
Kritiken,  1842,  i.  102  sq.) 

A  council  is  an  assembly  of  bishops  or  pastors  called 
together  for  the  discussion  and  regulation  of  ecclesias- 

(205) 


206  HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 

tical  affairs.  The  beginning  of  the  system  of  church 
councils  is  traced  to  the  meeting  of  the  apostles  and 
elders  at  Jerusalem,  as  recorded  in  Acts  xv.  This,  as 
mentioned  above,  is  generally  considered  to  be  the  first 
council;  but  it  differed  from  all  others  in  this  circum- 
stance, that  it  was  under  the  special  guidance  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  Roman  Catholic  writers  speak  of  four 
Apostolical  Councils,  viz:  Acts  i.  13,  for  the  election 
of  an  apostle;  Acts  vi.,  to  choose  deacons;  Acts  xv., 
the  one  named  above;  Acts  xxi.  18  sq.  But  none-  of 
these  had  a  public  and  general  character,  except  the 
one  in  Acts  xv.  (Schaff  History  of  Christian  Church  ii. 
sec.  65).  Although  the  gospel  was  soon  after  propaga- 
ted in  many  parts  of  Europe,  Asia  and  Africa,  there  is 
not  a  particle  of  evidence  to  show  that  any  public 
meeting  of  Christians  was  held  for  the  purpose  of  dis- 
cussing any  contested  point  until  the  middle  of  the 
second  century.  From  that  time  councils  became  fre- 
quent; but  as  they  consisted  only  of  those  who  belonged 
to  particular  districts  or  countries,  they  are  usually 
termed  diocesan,  provincial,  patriarchal  or  national  coun- 
cils, in  contradistinction  to  (Ecumenical  or  general  councils, 
i.  e.,  supposed  to  comprise  delegates  or  commissioners 
from  all  the  churches  in  the  Christian  world,  and  conse- 
quently supposed  to  represent  the  Church  universal. 

According  to  Dr.  Schaff,  the  word  oecumenical  occurs 
first  in  the  sixth  canon  of  Constantinople,  A.  D.  381. 
But  no  such  assembly  was  held,  or  could  be  held,  before 
the  establishment  of  the  Christian  religion  over  the 
ruins  of  paganism  in  the  Roman  Empire.  Their  title 
to  represent  the  whole  Christian  world  is  not  valid. 
After  the  fourth  century  the  "lower  clergy  and  the 
laity"  were  entirely  excluded  from  the  councils,  and 
bishops  only  admitted.  The  number  of  bishops  gath- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  207 

ered  at  the  greatest  of  the  councils,  constituted  but  a 
small  portion  of  the  number  who  claimed  to  be  bishops. 
The  O3cumenical  councils  which  are  generally  admitted 
to  bear  that  title  most  justly  were  rather  Greek  than 
general  councils.  In  the  strict  and  proper  sense  of  the 
term,  therefore,  no  oecumenical  council  has  ever  been 
held.  There  are  seven  councils  admitted  by  both  the 
Greek  and  Latin  churches  as  ecumenical,  to  which 
number  the  Roman  Catholics  add  twelve,  making  nine- 
teen in  all,  which  we  now  shall  notice  in  their  regular 
historical  order. 

I     APOSTOLICAL   COUNCIL. 

This  council  convened  in  Jerusalem,  A.  D.  47,  and, 
according  to  the  meaning  of  the  term,  is  the  only  coun- 
cil mentioned  in  the  New  Testament.  The  conversion 
of  Cornelius  having  thrown  open  the  Church  of  Christ 
to  the  Gentiles,  many  uncircumcised  persons  were  soon 
gathered  into  the  congregation  formed  at  Antioch  under 
the  labors  of  Paul  and  Barnabas;  but,  on  the  visit  of 
certain  Jewish  Christians  from  Jerusalem,  a  dispute 
arose  as  to  the  admission  of  such  Gentiles  as  had  not 
even  been  proselytes  to  Judaism,  but  were  brought  in 
directly  from  paganism.  To  settle  this  question,  the 
brethren  at  Antioch  deputed  Paul  and  Barnabas,  with 
several  others,  to  lay  the  matter  before  a  general  meet- 
ing of  the  apostles  and  elders  in  the  Jerusalem  congre- 
gation, which  was  the  first  congregation  formed  under 
the  apostles,  and  obtain  their  formal  and  final  decision 
>n  a  point  of  so  vital  importance  to  the  progress  of  the 
gospel  in  all  heathen  lands.  On  their  arrival  and  pre- 
sentation of  the  subject,  a  similar  opposition  (and  of  a 
heated  character,  as  we  find  from  the  notices  in  Gal.  ii.) 
was  made  by  Christians  formerly  of  the  Pharisaic  party 


208  HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 

at  the  metropolis;  so  that  it  was  only  when,  after  con- 
siderable dispute,  Peter  had  rehearsed  his  experience 
with  reference  to  Cornelius,  and  tlie  signal  results  of 
the  labors  of  Paul  and  Barnabas  among  the  Gentiles 
had  been  recounted,  that  James,  as  president  of  the 
council,  pronounced  in  favor  of  releasing  those  received 
into  the  church  from  the  Gentiles,  without  requiring 
circumcision  or  the  observance  of  the  Mosaic  ceremonial 
law.  This  conclusion  was  generally  assented  to,  and 
promulgated  in  a  regular  authoritative  form,  and  was 
sent  back  to  Antioch  by  Paul  and  Barnabas  by  letter 
message,  to  be  thence  circulated  in  all  the  churches  in 
pagan  countries.  By  the  decision  of  this  council,  the 
faithful  were  commanded  to  abstain  (1)  from  meats 
which  had  been  offered  to  idols  (so  as  not  even  to 
appear  to  countenance  the  worship  of  the  heathen),  (2) 
from  blood  and  strangled  things,  and  (3)  from  fornica- 
tion— the  prevailing  vice  of  the  Gentiles. 

II.    COUNCIL    OF    NICE. 

Two  Church  councils  have  been  held  at  X'icsea,  but 
only  the  first  of  these  was  properly  oecumenical,  and  it 
is  regarded  as  the  most  important  of  such  assemblies. 
It  was  convened  by  the  Emperor  Constantino  in  A.  D. 
325.  Along  with  the  imperial  summoning  of  the 
council,  the  different  bishops  were  proffered  the  service 
of  public  conveyances  for  themselves  and  two  presbyters 
and  three  servants;  and  when  the  318  bishops  who  had 
complied  with  the  Emperor's  request  gathered  at  Xice, 
the  Emperor  himself  opened  the  council,  June  19,  in 
his  own  palace,  and  its  use  for  future  sessions  was  af- 
forded to  this  august  body  of  ecclesiastics,  as  it  appears 
from  the  records  that  the  sessions  continuing  for  two 
months,  were  held  sometimes  at  the  palace,  and  some- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  209 

times  at  a  Church  or  some  public  building.  The 
Empire,  at  the  time  of  the  call  of  the  council,  contained 
in  all  about  1800  bishops  (1000  for  the  Greek  provinces, 
800  for  the  Latin),  and  of  these,  if  318  attended  as  re- 
ported by  Athanasius  (Ad.  Apos.  c.  2.  et  al),  Socrates 
(Hist.  Eccles.  bk.  viii.)  and  Theodoret  (Hist.  Ecdes.  i- 
7),  there  were  one-sixth  of  the  "  episcopal  sees  "  repre- 
sented at  I^ice — a  large  number,  indeed,  if  we  take  into 
consideration  the  vastness  of  the  imperial  realm,  and 
the  difficulty  of  travel  in  those  times.  Including  the 
presbyters  and  deacons  and  other  attendants,  the  num- 
ber may  have  amounted  in  all  to  between  1500  and 
2000.  Most  of  the  Eastern  provinces  were  strongly 
represented.  Besides  a  great  number  of  obscure  me- 
diocrities, there  were  several  venerable  and  distin- 
guished men,  as  e.  g. ,  Eusebius  of  Csesarea,  who  was 
most  eminent  for  learning;  the  "young  archdeacon 
Athanasius,"  who  accompanied  the  bishop  Alexander 
of  Alexandria,  and  who  was  noted  for  zeal,  intellect 
and  eloquence. 

"  Some,  as  confessors,  still  bore  in  their  bodies 
the  marks  of  Christ  from  the  times  of  persecution; 
Paphantias  of  the  Upper  Thebaid,  Potamon  of  Ilera- 
klea,  whose  right  eye  had  been  put  out,  and  Paul  of 
Neo-Csesarea,  who  had  been  tortured  with  red-hot 
iron  under  Licinius,  and  was  crippled  in  both  his  hands. 
Others  were  distinguished  for  extraordinary  ascetic  holi- 
ness, and  even  for  miraculous  works;  like  Jacob  of 
Nisibis,  who  spent  years  as  a  hermit  in  forests  and 
caves,  and  lived  like  a  wild  beast  on  roots  and  leaves, 
and  Spyridion  (or  St.  Spiro),  of  Cyprus,  the  patron  of 
the  Ionian  Isles,  who  even  after  his  ordination  remained 
a  simple  shepherd.  The  Latin  Church,  on  the  contrary, 
had  only  seven  delegates:  from  Spain  Hosius  or  Osius, 
18 


210  HISTORY  or  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 

of  Cordova,  the  ablest  and  most  influential  of  the  "West- 
ern  representatives;  from  France,  Nicasius  of  Dijon, 
from  North  Africa,  Csecelian  of  Carthage;  from  Pan- 
nonia,  Domnus  of  Strido;  from  Italy,  Eustorgias  of 
Milan,  and  Marcus  of  Calabria;  from  Rome,  the  two 
presbyters  Victor,  or  Vitus,  and  Vincentius,  as  delegates 
of  the  aged  Pope  Sylvester  I.  who  found  it  impossible 
to  attend  in  person.  A  Persian  bishop,  John,  also,  and 
a  Gothic  bishop,  Theophilus,  the  forerunner  and  teacher 
of  the  Gothic  Bible  translator  Ulfilas,  were  present." 
(McClintock  and  Strong's  Encyc.  vol.  vii.  p.  44.) 

Various  theories  have  been  propounded  to  explain 
Constantino's  aim  in  calling  this  council.  By  some  it 
is  represented  as  serving  a  political  purpose  (based  on 
Eusebius  Vita.  Constant  iii.  4);  by  others  it  is  regarded 
as  intended  to  restore  quiet  to  the  Church  and  unite  all 
its  parties  in  the  great  Trinitarian  question  on  which 
the  Church  was  at  that  time  greatly  divided — there  ex- 
isting three  parties:  one,  which  may  be  called  the  ortho- 
dox party,  held  firmly  to  the  doctrine  of  the  deity  of 
Christ;  the  second  was  the  Arian  party,  who  regarded 
Christ  as  only  a  man;  and  the  third,  which  was  in  the 
majority,  taking  conciliatory  or  middle  ground,  and 
consenting  to  the  use  of  such  christological  expressions 
as  all  parties  could  consistently  agree  upon;  they  ac- 
knowledged the  divine  nature  of  Christ  in  general  bib- 
lical terms,  but  avoided  the  use  of  the  term  homoousian 
(which  means  like  substance  with  the  Father),  which  the 
Arians  decried  as  unscriptural,  Sabellian,  and  material- 
istic. According  to  Pusey,  "Constantino  did  not  un- 
derstand the  doctrine,  and  attached  as  much  or  more 
importance  to  uniformity  in  keeping  Easter  as  to  unity 
of  faith.  Indeed,  he  himself  at  this  time  believed  in  no 
doctrine  but  that  of  Providence,  and  spared  no  terms  of 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  211 

contempt  as  to  the  pettiness  of  the  dispute  between 
Alexander  and  Arius"  (Councils  of  the  Church  p.  102); 
yet  it  would  seem  that  Constantino  only  called  a  council 
when  he  believed  it  impossible  to  restore  peace  between 
the  contending  parties,  led  respectively  by  Arius  and 
Alexander,  and  now  turned  over  the  case  for  settlement 
to  the  bishops,  who  appeared  to  him  to  be  the  repre- 
sentatives of  God  and  Christ,  the  organs  of  the  divine 
Spirit  "that  enlightened  and  guided  the  Church,"  and 
he  appears  to  have  hopod  that  when  in  council  assem- 
bled, analogous  to  the  established  custom  of  deciding 
controversies  in  the  single  provinces  by  assemblies  com- 
posed of  all  the  provincial  bishops,  they  would  be  able 
to  dispose  of  the  present  controversy. 

No  complete  collection  of  the  transactions  of  this 
Nicsean  oecumenical  council  have  come  down  to  us. 
Some  account  of  the  bishops  who  composed  this  assem- 
bly is  given  by  Socrates,  Sozomen  and  Theodoret.  It 
is  uncertain  who  presided,  but  it  is  generally  supposed 
that  the  president  was  Hosius,  bishop  of  Cordova  in 
Spain.  From  the  reports  of  two  of  its  attendants, 
Athanasius  and  Eusebius  of  Csesarea,  we  learn  that  it 
busied  itself  mainly  with  the  settlement  of  the  different 
christological  views.  The  opening  sessions  were  princi- 
pally devoted,  according  to  these  writers,  to  a  con- 
sideration of  Arian  views,  and  resulted  finally  in  the 
examination  of  Arius  himself.  He  did  not  hesitate  to 
maintain  that  the  Son  of  God  was  a  creature,  made 
from  nothing;  that  there  was  a  time  when  he  had  no 
existence;  that  he  was  capable  of  his  own  free  will  of 
right  and  wrong.  Athanasius,  although  at  the  time 
but  a  deacon,  drew  the  attention  of  the  whole  council 
by  his  marvelous  penetration  in  unraveling  and  laying 
open  the  artifices  of  the  heretical  views  of  Arius  and  his 


212  HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 

followers.  He  resisted  Eusebius,  Theognis,  and  Mans, 
the  chief  supporters  of  Arius,  and  evinced  such  zeal  in 
defense  of  the  truth  that  he  attracted  both  the  admira- 
tion of  all  the  anti-Arian  party  and  the  bitter  hatred  of 
the  Arian  party.  We  are  told  that  so  great  and  far- 
reaching  was  the  influence  of  the  criticism  of  Athanasius 
that  many  of  the  Arians  became  doubtful  of  their  own 
standpoint,  and  eighteen  of  them  abandoned  the  cause 
of  Arius.  The  orthodox  party  themselves  became  en- 
thusiastic in  behalf  of  their  cause,  and  when  Eusebius 
of  Csesarea  proposed  a  confession  of  faith — an  ancient 
Palestinian  confession,  which  was  very  similar  to  the 
Nicene,  and  acknowledged  the  divine  nature  of  Christ 
in  general  biblical  terms,  but  avoided  the  term  i.i  ques- 
tion (homoousios,  of  the  same  essence),  they  rejected  it, 
though  the  emperor  had  seen  and  approved  this  confes- 
sion, and  even  the  Arian  minority  were  ready  to  accept 
it.  They  wished  a  creed  which  no  Arian  could  honestly 
subscribe,  and  especially  insisted  on  inserting  the  ex- 
pression homo-usios,  which  the  Arians  so  much  objected 
to.  The  fathers  finally  presented  through  Hosius  of 
Cordova  another  confession,  which  became  the  sub- 
stance of  what  is  now  known  and  owned  by  the  ortho- 
dox churches  as  the  well-known  ISucene  Creed.  Here 
?s  the  Nicene  Creed,  as  translated  from  the  Greek,  and 
which  was  adopted  at  the  council  of  Nice  in  325: 

THE    NICEXE    CREED. 

We  believe  in  one  God,  the  Father  Almighty,  Maker 
of  all  things  visible  and  invisible;  and  in  one  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  God  begotten  of  the  Father; 
only -begotten,  that  is  of  the  substance  of  the  Father; 
God  of  God;  Light  of  Light;  very  God  of  very  God; 
begotten,  not  made ;  of  the  same  substance  with  the 
Father;  by  whom  all  things  were  made,  both  things  in 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  213 

heaven  and  things  in  earth;  who  for  us  men  and  our 
salvation  descended  and  became  flesh,  was  made  man, 
suffered,  and  rose  again  the  third  day.  He  ascended 
into  heaven;  he  cometh  to  judge  the  quick  and  dead. 
And  in  the  Holy  Spirit.  But  those  who  say  there  was 
a  time  when  he  was  not;  or  that  he  was  not  before  he 
was  begotten ;  or  that  he  was  made  from  that  which 
had  no  being;  or  who  affirm  the  Son  of  God  to  be  of 
any  other  substance  or  essence,  or  created,  or  variable, 
or  mutable,  such  persons  doth  the  Catholic  and  Apos- 
tolic Church  anathematize. 

This  creed  was  enlarged  at  the  Second  Council  of  Con- 
stantinople, in  381,  by  which  the  faitli  of  the  Church 
with  regard  to  the  person  of  Christ  was  set  forth  in  op- 
position to  certain  errors,  notably  Arianism.  Moreover, 
not  only  the  Semi-Arians,  but  even  many  of  the  ISTiceni- 
ans  (followers  of  the  Nicene  Creed),  held,  with  the  Ari- 
ans,  and  especially  the  Macedonians,  that  the  Holy  Spirit 
was  created  by  the  Father  (Gieseler  i.  c.).  After  inef- 
fectual attempts,  at  several  synods,  to  agree  upon  a 
formula,  the  Nicene  Symbol,  with  certain  additions,  was 
adopted  in  381,  as  already  stated,  at  the  second  oecumen- 
ical Council  of  Constantinople.  The  parts  added  at 
Constantinople  are  put  in  brackets.  We  append  it  be- 
low as  enlarged : 

(1)  I  believe  in  one  God,  the  Father  Almighty,  Maker 
[of  heaven  and  earth],  and  of  all  things  visible  and  in- 
visible. (2)  And  in  one  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  only- 
begotten  Son  of  God,  begotten  of  his  Father  [before  all 
worlds];  [God  of  God];  Light  of  Light;  very  God  of 
very  God;  begotten,  not  made;  being  of  one  substance 
with  the  Father,  by  whom  all  things  were  made.  (3) 
Who  for  us  men  and  our  salvation  came  down  from 
heaven,  and  was  incarnate  [by  the  Holy  Spirit  of  the 
Virgin  Mary],  and  was  made  man  [and  was  crucified, 
also,  for  us  under  Pontius  Pilate];  he  suffered  and  \vas 
buried ;  and  the  third  day  he  rose  again,  according  to 


214  HISTORY  OF  CllURCli  COUNCILS. 

the  Scriptures ;  and  ascended  into  heaven  [and  sitteth 
on  the  right  hand  of  the  Father].  And  he  shall  come 
again  with  glory  to  judge  both  the  quick  aud  the  dead 
[whose  kingdom  shall  have  no  end].  And  I  believe  in 
the  Holy  Spirit  [the  Lord  and  Giver  of  Life],  who  pro- 
ceedeth  from  the  Father  [and  the  Son],  who,  with  the 
Father  and  the  Son  together  is  worshiped  and  glorified; 
who  spake  by  the  prophets.  And  I  believe  in  one  cath- 
olic and  apostolic  Church.  I  acknowledge  one  baptism 
for  the  remission  of  sins,  and  I  look  for  the  resurrection 
of  the  dead,  and  the  life  of  the  world  to  come.  Amen. 
The  decision  of  the  council  having  been  laid  before 
Constantine,  he  saw  clearly  that  the  Eusebian  formula 
would  not  pass;  and  as  he  had  at  heart,  for  the  sake  of 
peace,  the  most  nearly  unanimous  decision  which  was 
possible,  he  gave  his  voice  for  the  disputed  word,  and 
declared  that  he  recognized  in  the  unanimous  consent 
of  the  bishops  the  work  of  God,  and  received  it  with 
reverence,  declaring  that  all  those  persons  should  be 
banished  who  refused  to  submit  to  it.  Upon  this  the 
Arians,  through  fear,  also  anathematized  the  dogmas 
condemned,  and  subscribed  the  faith  laid  down  by  the 
council;  that  they  did  so  only  outwardly  was  shown  by 
their  subsequent  conduct.  It  was  declared  by  its  advo- 
cates that  it  was  presented  after  mature  deliberation,  and 
after  diligent  consultation  of  all  that  the  holy  evangelists 
and  apostles  have  taught  upon  the  subject;  and  it  pro- 
ceeded to  set  forth  the  true  doctrine  of  the  Church  in  a 
creed,  in  which,  in  order  to  defy  all  the  subtleties  of  the 
Arians  (says  a  modern  "orthodox"  historian),  the  coun- 
cil thought  good  to  express  by  the  term  "consubstan- 
tial" — homoousios — the  divine  essence  or  substance  which 
is  common  to  the  Father  and  the  Son.  According  to 
Athanasius,  this  creed  was  in  a  great  measure  composed 
by  Hosius,  of  Cordova.  It  was  written  out  by  Hermo- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  215 

genes,  bishop  of  Ctesarea,  in  Cappadocia,  and  subscribed, 
together  with  the  condemnation  of  the  dogmas  and 
expressions  of  Arius,  by  all  the  bishops  present  with  the 
exception  of  a  few  of  the  Arians.  Socrates  (lib.  i.,  c/t. 
5)  says  that  all  the  bishops  except  live;  Baronius,  that 
all  except  Eusebius,  of  Nicoraedia,  and  Theognis,  of  JS:i- 
csea,  assented  to  the  use  of  the  word  ofjiooixrio^ — ho  moo  a- 
sios.  According  to  Cave,  Secundus,  of  Ptclemais,  and 
Theognis,  of  Marmorica,  alone  refused.  Arius  himself 
was  banished,  by  Constantino's  order,  to  Illyria,  where 
he  remained  until  his  recall,  which  took  place  five  years 
after. 

We  have  now  transbribed  the  chief  acts  of  the  JSTicene 
Council;  but  that  our  readers  may  have,  if  possible,  the 
full  benefit  of  the  minor  proceedings  of  "the  great  and 
holy  council,"  which  "holds  the  highest  place  among  all 
the  councils,"  we  proceed  to  show  what  other  grave  mat- 
ters were  disposed  of  by  these  famous  bishops. 

First.  They  considered  the  subject  of  the  Meletian 
schism,  which  for  some  time  past  had  divided  Egypt, 
and  they  decreed  that  Meletius  should  keep  the  title  and 
rank  of  bishop  in  his  see  of  Lycopolis,  in  Egypt,  forbid- 
ding him,  however,  to  perform  any  episcopal  functions; 
also,  that  they  whom,  he  had  elevated  to  any  ecclesias- 
tical dignities  should  be  admitted  to  communion,  upon 
condition  that  they  should  take  rank  after  those  who 
were  enrolled  in  any  parish  (the  district  under  a  bishop's 
jurisdiction,  which  is  now  called  a  "diocese,"  was  so 
styled  in  the  Church  at  that  time),  and  who  had  been 
ordained  by  Alexander.  Second.  They  decreed  that 
throughout  the  Church,  the  festival  of  Easter  should  be 
celebrated  on  the  Sunday  after  the  full  moon  which 
happens  next  after  March  21.  Third.  They  published 
twenty  canons  or  rules ;  and  here  they  are  : 


216  HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 

1.  Excludes   from   the    exercise   of   their   functions 
those  persons  in  holy  orders  who  have  made  themselves 
eunuchs. 

2.  Forbids  to  raise  neophytes  to  the  priesthood  or 
episcopate. 

3.  Forbids  any  bishop,  priest  or  deacon  to  have  women 
in  their  houses,  except  their  mothers,  sisters,  aunts,  or 
such  women  as  shall  be  beyond  the  reach  of  slander. 

4.  Declares  that  a  bishop  ought,  if  possible,  to  be  con- 
stituted by  all  the  bishops  of  the  province,  but  allows 
of  his  consecration  by  three,  at  least,  with  the  consent 
of  the  absent  bishops  signified  in  writing;  the  consecra- 
tion to  be  finally  contirmed  by  the  metropolitan. 

5.  Orders  that  they  who  have  been  separated  from  the 
communion  of  the  Church  by  their  own  bishop  shall  not 
be  received   into  communion  elsewhere.     Also,   that  a 
provincial  synod  shall  be  held  twice  a  year  in  every 
province   to  examine   into  sentences  of  excommunica- 
tion; one  synod  to  be  held  before  Lent,  and  the  second 
in  autumn. 

6.  Insists  upon  the  preservation  of  the  rights  and 
privileges  of  the  bishops  of  Alexandria,  Antioch,  and 
other  provinces. 

7.  Grants  to  the  bishop  of  ./Elia  (xElia  Capitolina, 
the  new  city  built  by  ^Elius  Hadrianus  upon  the  site  of 
Jerusalem,  or  near  it),  according  to  ancient  tradition,  the 
second  place  of  honor. 

8.  Permits  those  who  had  been  ministers  among  the 
Cathari,  and  who  returned  into  the  bosom  of  the  Cath- 
olic and  Apostolic  Church,  having  received  imposition 
of  hands,  to  remain  in  the  ranks  of  the  clergy.     Directs, 
however,  that  they  shall,  in  writing,  make  profession  to 
follow  the  decrees  of  the  Church;  and  that  they  shall 
communicate  with  those  who  have  married  twice,  and 
with  those  who  have  performed  penance  for  relapsing 
in  time  of  persecution.     Directs,  further,  that  in  places 
where  there  is  a  Catholic  bishop  and  a  converted  bishop 
of  the  Cathari  (those  pretending  to  peculiar  purity  of 
life),  the  former  shall  retain  his  rank  and  office,  and  the 
latter  be  considered  only  as  a  priest;  or  the  bishop  may 
assign  him  the  place  of  chorepiscopus. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  217 

9.  Declares  to  be  null  and  void  the  ordination  of 
priests  made  without  due  inquiry,  and  of  those   who 
have,  before  ordination,  confessed  sins  committed. 

10.  Declares  the  same  of  persons  ordained   priests 
in  ignorance,  or  whose  sin  has  appeared  after  ordina- 
tion. 

11.  Enacts  that  those  who  have  fallen  away  in  time 
of  persecution  without  strong  temptation  shall  be  three 
years  among  the  hearers,  seven  years  among  the  pros- 
trators,  and  for  two  years  shall  communicate  with  the 
people  without  offering  ("communicate  with  the  people 
in  prayer,  without  being  admitted  to  the  oblation;"  i.  e., 
to  the  holy  eucharist,  according  to  Johnson's  way  of  un- 
derstanding it). 

12.  Imposes  ten  years'  penance  upon  any  one  of  the 
military,  who,  having  been  deprived  of  a  post  on  account 
of  the  faith,  shall,  after  all,  give  a  bribe,  and  deny  the 
faith,  in  order  to  receive  it  back  again. 

13.  Forbids  to  deny  the  holy  communion  to  any  one 
likely  to  die. 

14.  Orders  that  catechumens  who  have  relapsed  shall 
be  three  years  among  the  hearers. 

15.  Forbids  bishops,  priests  or  deacons  to  remove  from 
one  city  to  another;  or  any  one  offending  against  this 
canon  to  be  compelled  to  return  to  his  own  church,  and 
his  translation  to  be  void. 

16.  Priests  or  deacons  removing  from  their  own  church 
not  to  be  received  into  any  other;  those  who  persist,  to 
be  separated  from  communion.     If  any  bishop  dare  to 
ordain  a  man  belonging  to  another  church,  the  ordina- 
tion to  be  void. 

17.  Directs  that  all  clerks  guilty  of  usury  shall  be 
deposed. 

18.  Forbids  deacons  to  give  the  eucharist  to  priests, 
and  to  receive  it  themselves  before  the  priests,  and  to 
sit  among  the  priests;  offenders  to  be  deposed. 

19.  Directs  that  Paulianists  coming  over  to  the  Church 
shall   be  baptized  again.     Permits  those  among  their 
clergy  who  are  without  reproach,  after  baptism,  to  be 
ordained  by  the  Catholic  bishops;  orders  the  same  thing 
of  deaconesses. 

19 


218  HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 

20.  Orders  that  all  persons  shall  offer  up  their  prayers 
on  Sundays  and  Pentecost,  standing. 

It  was  also  proposed  to  add  another  canon,  enjoining 
continence  upon  the  married  clergy;  Paphnutius  warm- 
ly opposed  the  imposition  of  such  a  yoke,  and  prevailed, 
so  that  the  proposal  fell  to  the  ground.  The  creed  and 
the  canons  were  written  in  a  book,  and  signed  by  the 
bishops.  The  council  issued  a  letter  to  the  Egyptian 
and  Libyan  bishops  as  to  the  decision  of  the  three  main 
points;  the  emperor  also  sent  several  edicts  to  the  church- 
es, in  which  he  ascribed  the  decrees  to  divine  inspi- 
ration, and  sent  them  forth  as  laws  of  the  realm.  On 
July  29,  the  twentieth  anniversary  of  his  accession,  the 
emperor  gave  the  members  of  the  council  a  splendid 
banquet  in  his  palace,  which  Eusebius  (quite  too  sus- 
ceptible of  worldly  splendor)  describes  as  a  figure  of  the 
reign  of  Christ  on  earth.  Constantino  remunerated  the 
bishops  lavishly,  and  dismissed  them  with  a  suitable 
valedictory,  and  with  letters  of  commendation  to  the 
authorities  of  all  the  provinces  on  their  homeward  way. 

COUNCILS  OF  CONSTANTINOPLE. 

The  first  oecumenical  Council  of  Constantinople  was 
convoked  in  this  eastern  city  in  381  by  Theodosius  the 
Great.  There  were  present  150  "orthodox  bishops" 
(mostly  eastern)  and  36  followers  of  Macedonius,  who 
left  Constantinople  when  his  doctrine  was  rejected  by 
the  majority.  The  council  condemned,  besides  the 
Macedonians,  the  Arians,  Unomians  and  Eudoxians, 
and  confirmed  the  resolutions  of  the  Council  of  Nice. 
It  assigned  to  the  bishop  of  Constantinople  the  second 
rank  in  the  Church,  next  to  the  bishop  of  Rome,  and  in 
controversies  between  the  two  reserved  the  decision  to 
the  emperor. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  219 

THE  SECOND  COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANTINOPLE. — This  coun- 
cil (the  fifth  in  the  list  of  oecumenical  councils)  was  held 
in  553  on  account  of  the  Three  Chapters'  controversy, 
by  165,  mostly  Oriental  bishops.  This  council  excom- 
municated the  defenders  of  the  Three  Chapters — Theo- 
dore of  Mopsuestia,  Ibas,  and  others,  and  the  Roman 
bishop  Vigilius,  who  refused  to  condemn  the  Three 
Chapters  unconditionally. 

THIRD  COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANTINOPLE. — This  is  the  sixth 
in  the  list  of  oecumenical  councils,  and  was  held  from 
680  to  681  in  the  Trullan  palace,  and  was  attended  by 
289  bishops,  among  whom  were  three  Oriental  patriarchs, 
and  four  legates  of  the  Roman  bishop  Agathon.  The 
opinions  of  the  Monothelites  were  condemned,  espe- 
cially through  the  influence  of  the  Roman  legates,  as 
heretical.  The  General  Council  convoked  in  091  by  the 
Emperor  Justinian  II.,  was  also  held  in  the  Trullan  pal- 
ace. As  it  was  regarded  as  supplementing  the  fifth  and 
sixth  oecumenical  councils,  which  had  given,  no  Church 
laivs,  it  was  called  Quinisexta  (Synodus)  or  Qidniscxtum 
(Concilium).  It  enacted  102  stringent  canons  on  the 
morals  of  clergymen  and  ecclesiastical  discipline.  It  is 
recognized  as  an  oecumenical  council  by  the  Greeks  only. 

FIFTH  COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANTINOPLE. — This  assembled  in 
754,  and  was  attended  by  383  bishops.  It  passed  reso- 
lutions against  the  veneration  of  images,  which  were 
repealed  by  the  second  oecumenical  council  of  Nice.  It 
is  not  recognized  by  the  Latin  Church,  but  only  by  the 
Greek  Church. 

SIXTH  COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANTINOPLE. — This  was  held  in 
869,  and  by  the  Church  of  Rome  is  regarded  as  the 
fourth  oecumenical  council  of  Constantinople,  or  the 
eighth  in  the  list  of  oecumenical  councils.  It  deposed 
the  patriarch  Photius,  restored  the  patriarch  Ignatius, 


220  HISTORY  OF  CIIURCH  COUNCILS. 

and  enacted  laws  on  Church  discipline.  It  is,  of  course, 
not  recognized  by  the  Greek  or  Eastern  Church.  In  879 
another  General  Synod  was  held  at  Constantinople,  at- 
tended by  380  bishops,  among  whom  were  the  legates 
of  Pope  John  VIII.  Photius  was  recalled,  the  resolu- 
tions of  the  preceding  council  against  him  repealed,  and 
the  position  of  the  patriarch  of  Constantinople  to  the 
Pope  defined.  The  Greeks  number  this  as  the  eighth 
oecumenical  council.  The  ninth  oecumenical  council  of 
the  Greek  Church  was  held  in  Constantinople,  under 
the  Emperor  Adronicus  the  Younger,  in  1341.  It  con- 
demned the  opinions  of  Barlaam  as  heretical. 

PARTICULAR  SYNODS. — The  most  important  of  the  par- 
ticular synods  are:  1  and  2.  In  336  and  339,  two  Arian 
synods,  under  the  leadership  of  Eusebius,  of  Nicomedia. 
The  former  deposed  and  excommunicated  Marcellus,  of 
Ancyra;  the  latter  deposed  and  expelled  Bishop  Paulus, 
of  Constantinople,  and  appointed  Eusebius  his  successor. 
3.  A  semi-Arian  Synod  against  ./Etius,  who  was  banish- 
ed. 4.  In  426,  a  synod  held  against  the  Messalians;  in 
418,  449  and  450,  synods  against  the  Eutychians.  5.  In 
495  and  496,  Eutychian  synods,  condemning  their  oppo- 
nents, and  recognizing  the  Henoticon,  of  Geno.  6.  A 
synod,  in  516,  condemned  the  resolutions  of  the  council 
of  Chalcedon.  7.  In  536,  against  Severus,  Anthimtis, 
and  other  chiefs  of  the  Acephali.  8.  In  541  (543?) 
against  some  views  of  Origen.  9.  In  815,  two  synods 
on  the  question  of  veneration  of  images;  the  one,  at- 
tended by  270  bishops,  in  favor,  and  the  second  against 
the  images.  10.  In  861,  introducing  the  patriarch  Pho- 
tius, and  approving  the  veneration  of  images.  11.  In 
1170  (according  to  others,  1168),  a  synod,  attended  by 
many  Eastern  and  Western  bishops,  on  the  reunion  of 
the  Eastern  and  Latin  churches.  Similar  synods  were 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  L21 

held  in  1277, 1280, 1285,  all  without  effect.  12.  In  1450, 
a  council  convoked  by  the  Emperor  Constantine  Palre- 
ologus  deposed  the  patriarch  Gregory,  put  in  his  place 
the  patriarch  Athanasius,  and  declined  to  accept  the  res- 
olutions passed  by  the  council  of  Florence  in  favor  of 
the  union  of  the  Greek  and  the  Latin  churches.  13.  In 
1638  and  1642,  two  synods  held  against  the  crypto-Cal- 
vinism  of  the  patriarch  Cyril  Lucaris. 

GENERAL  COUNCIL  OF  EPHESUS. 

The  third  oecumenical  council,  convoked  by  the  em- 
peror Theodosius  II.,  was  held  at  Ephesus  in  431,  upon 
the  controversy  raised  by  Nestorius,  bishop  of  Constant- 
inople, who  objected  to  the  application  of  the  title  of 
Szo-oxo;;*  (theotokos)  to  the  Virgin  Mary.  Celestine, 
the  Pope,  not  seeing  fit  to  attend  in  person,  sent  three 
legates,  Arcadius  and  Projectus,  bishops,  and  Philip,  a 
priest.  Among  the  first  who  arrived  at  the  council  was 
!N"estorius,  with  a  numerous  body  of  followers,  and 
accompanied  by  Irenseus,  a  nobleman,  his  friend  and 
protector  Cyril  of  Alexandria  also,  and  Juvenal  of 
Jerusalem  came,  accompanied  by  about  fifty  of  the 
Egyptian  bishops;  Memnon  of  Ephesus  had  brought 
together  about  forty  of  the  bishops  within  his  jurisdic- 
tion; and  altogether  more  than  two  hundred  bishops 
were  present.  Candidianus,  the  commander  of  the 
forces  of  Ephesus  attended,  by  order  of  the  emperor, 
to  keep  peace  and  order;  but  by  his  conduct  he  greatly 
favored  the  partv  of  Nestorius.  The  day  appointed  for 
the  opening  of  the  council  was  June  7th;  but  John  of 
Antioch,  and  the  other  bishops  from  Syria  and  the  East 
not  having  arrived,  it  was  delayed  till  the  22d  of  the 
same  month.  At  the  first  session  of  the  council  (June 

*The  offspring  of  God. 


222  HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 

22),  before  the  Greek  and  Syrian  bishops  had  arrived, 
Cyril  and  the  bishops  present  condemned  the  doctrines 
of  Nestorius,  and  deposed  and  excommunicated  him. 
This  sentence  was  signed  by  198  bishops,  according  to 
Tillemont,  and  by  more  than  200  according  to  Fletiry; 
it  was  immediately  made  known  to  Nestorius,  and  pub- 
lished in  the  public  places.  /At  the  same  time,  notice 
of  the  act  was  sent  to  the  clergy  and  to  the  people  of 
Constantinople,  with  a  recommendation  to  them  to 
secure  the  property  of  the  Church  for  the  successor  of 
the  deprived  Nestorius.  As  soon,  however,  as  Nestorius 
had  received  notice  of  this  sentence,  he  protested  against 
it,  and  all  that  had  passed  at  the  council,  and  forwarded 
to  the  Emperor  an  account  of  what  had  been  done,  set- 
ting forth  that  Cyril  and  Memnon,  refusing  to  wait  for 
John  and  the  other  bishops,  had  hurried  matters  on  in 
a  tumultuous  and  irregular  way.  On  the  27th  of  June, 
twenty-seven  Syrian  bishops  arrived,  chose  John  of 
Antioch  for  their  president,  and  deposed  Cyril  in  their 
turn.  In  August,  Count  John,  who  had  been  sent  by 
Theodosius,  arrived  at  Ephesus,  and  directed  the  bishops 
of  both  synods  to  meet  him  on  the  following  day.  Ac- 
cordingly, John  of  Antioch  and  Nestorius  attended 
with  their  party,  and  Cyril  with  the  orthodox;  but  im- 
mediately a  dispute  arose  between  them;  the  latter  con- 
tending that  Nestorius  should  not  be  present,  while  the 
former  wished  to  exclude  Cyril.  Upon  this,  the  Count, 
to  quiet  the  dispute,  gave  both  Cyril  and  Nestorius  into 
custody,  and  then  endeavored,  but  in  vain,  to  reconcile 
the  two  parties.  And  thus  matters  seemed  as  far  from 
settlement  as  ever.  The  emperor  at  last  permitted  the 
fathers  of  the  council  to  send  to  him  eight  deputies, 
while  Orientals  or  Syrians,  on  -their  part,  sent  as  many. 
The  place  of  meeting  was  at  Chalcedon,  whither  the 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  223 

emperor  proceeded,  and  spent  five  days  in  listening  to 
the  arguments  on  both  sides;  and  here  the  Council  of 
Ephesus  may,  in  fact,  he  said  to  have  terminated. 
Nothing  is  known  of  what  passed  at  Chalcedon,  hut  the 
event  shows  that  Theodosius  sided  with  the  Catholics, 
since  upon  his  return  to  Constantinople  he  ordered,  by 
a  letter,  the  Catholic  deputies  to  come  there,  and  to  pro- 
ceed to  consecrate  a  bishop  in  the  place  of  ETestorius, 
whom  he  had  already  ordered  to  leave  Ephesus,  and  to 
confine  himself  to  his  monastery  near  Antioch.  After- 
wards he  directed  that  all  the  bishops  at  the  council,  in- 
cluding Cyril  and  Memnon,  should  return  to  their 
respective  dioceses.  The  judgment  of  this  council  was 
at  once  approved  by  the  whole  Western  Church,  and  by 
far  the  greater  part  of  the  East,  and  was  subsequently 
confirmed  by  the  (Ecumenical  Council  of  Chalcedon, 
consisting  of  630  bishops.  Even  John  of  Antioch  and 
the  Eastern  bishops  very  soon  acknowledged  it.  But 
Nestorius  protested  to  the  last  that  he  did  not  hold  the 
heretical  opinions  anathematized  by  the  council. 

Of  the  other  Councils  of  Ephesus,  the  following  are 
all  that  need  to  he  mentioned:  1.  In  245  (?)  against 
the  Patropassian  Ncetus ;  2.  In  400,  under  Chrysostom, 
where  Heraclidus  was  consecrated  bishop  of  Ephesus, 
and  six  simoniacal  bishops  deposed;  and  the  "Robber 
Council,"  the  details  of  which  it  is  unnecessary  to  give. 

COUNCIL    OF   CHALCEDON. 

This  (the  fourth  oecumenical  council)  was  held  in  451, 
and  was  convoked  by  the  emperor  Marcianus,  at  the  re- 
quest of  the  bishops  (especially  of  Leo  I.)  to  put  down 
the  Eutychian  and  Nestorian  heresies.  The  emperor 
had  first  summoned  the  bishops  to  meet  at  jSTicnea,  but 
when  the  time  approached  he  was  prevented  by  political 


224  HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 

troubles  from  going  so  far  from  the  imperial  city,  and 
therefore  changed  the  place  of  meeting  to  Chalcedon, 
in  Bithynia,  on  the  Bosphorus,  opposite  Constantinople. 
The  council  was  attended  by  630  bishops  and  deputies, 
all  Eastern  except  four  legates  sent  by  Leo  I.  from 
Rome.  The  sessions  begun  October  8,  451,  and  ended 
October  21.  As  the  two  parties  in  the  council  were 
roused  to  the  highest  pitch  of  passion,  the  proceedings, 
especially  during  the  early  sessions,  were  very  tumult- 
uous, until  the  lay  commissioners  and  senators  had  to 
urge  the  bishops  to  keep  order,  saying  that  such 
Sxjoyaziz  dqpoTtxdt  (vulgar  outc-ries)  were  disgraceful. 
(Mansi,  as  quoted  by  Stanley,  Eastern  Church  lect.  ii  p. 
165.) 

At  ihejirst  session  (October  8,  451)  the  council  assem- 
bled in  the  church  of  St.  Euphemia;  in  the  center  sat 
the  officers  of  the  emperor;  at  their  left,  or  on  the  epis- 
tle side,  sat  the  bishops  of  Constantinople,  Antioch, 
Caesarea  in  Cappadocia,  and  of  the  other  Eastern  dio- 
ceses, and  Pontus,  Asia  and  Thrace,  together  with  the 
four  legates;  on  the  other  side  were  Dioscurus,  Juvenal, 
Thalassius  of  Cresarea,  and  the  other  bishops  of  Egypt, 
Palestine  and  Illyria,  most  of  whom  had  been  present 
in  the  pseudo-council  of  Ephesus.  In  the  midst  were 
the  holy  gospels,  placed  upon  a  raised  seat.  When  they 
had  taken  their  seats,  the  legates  of  the  Pope  demanded 
that  Dioscurus  should  withdraw  from  the  assembly,  ac- 
cusing him  of  his  scandalous  conduct  at  Ephesns,  and 
declaring  that  otherwise  they  would  depart.  Then  the 
imperial  officers  ordered  him  to  withdraw  from  the  coun- 
cil, and  to  take  his  seat  among  the  accused.  The  acts 
of  the  so-called  "Robber  Council"  of  Ephesus  were  dis- 
cussed and  condemned,  and  Dioscurus  was  left  with  only 
twelve  bishops  to  stand  by  him.  The  Eutychian  heresy, 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  225 

that  iu  our  Lord  were  two  natures  before  his  incarna- 
tion, and  but  one  afterwards,  was  anathematized.  The 
majority  of  the  assembled  bishops  then  proceeded  to 
anathematize  Dioscurus  himself,  and  demanded  that  he, 
together  with  Juvenal  of  Jerusalem,  Thalassius  of  Ores- 
area,  Eusebius  of  Ancyra,  Eustachius  of'Berytus,  and 
Basil  of  Seleucia,  who  had  presided  at  the  council,  should 
be  deposed  from  the  episcopate. 

At  the  second  session  (October  10)  the  following  expo- 
sition of  faith,  substantially  taken  from  a  letter  of  Leo 
to  Flavianus,  was  approved,  and  its  opponents  anathe- 
matized:  "The  divine  nature  and  the  human  nature, 
each  remaining  perfect,  have  been  united  in  one  person, 
to  the  intent  that  the  same  Mediator  might  die,  being 
yet  immortal  and  impossible.  .  .  .  Neither  nature 
is  altered  by  the  other;  he  who  is  truly  God  is  also  truly 
man.  .  .  .  The  Word  and  the  flesh  preserve  each 
its  proper  functions.  Holy  Scripture  proves  equally  the 
verity  of  the  two  natures.  He  is  God,  since  it  i.s  writ- 
ten, 'In  the  beginning  was  the  Word,  and  the  Word 
was  God.'  He  is  also  man,  since  it  is  written,  'The 
Word  was  made  flesh,  and  dwelt  among  us.'  As  man, 
he  was  tempted  by  the  devil;  as  God,  he  is  ministered 
unto  by  angels.  As  man,  he  wept  over  the  tomb  of 
Lazarus;  as  God,  he  raised  him  from  the  dead.  As 
man,  he  is  nailed  to  the  cross;  as  God,  he  makes  all 
nature  tremble  at  his  death.  It  is  by  reason  of  the  un- 
ity of  the  person  that  we  say  that  the  Son  of  man  came 
down  from  heaven,  and  that  the  Son  of  God  was  cruci- 
fied and  buried,  although  he  was  so  only  as  to- his  human 
nature." 

At  the  third  session  the  deposition  of  Dioscurus  was 
pronounced  irrevocable,  and,  soon  after,  he  was  banished 


226  HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 

to  Gangra,  in  Paphlagonia,  where,  in  the  course  of  three 
years,  he  died. 

In  t\\e  fifth  session,  the  following  formula  of  faith,  on 
the  question  at  issue,  was  adopted:  "We  confess,  and 
with  one  accord  teach,  one  and  the  same  Sou,  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ;  perfect  in  the  divinity,  perfect  in  the  hu- 
manity, truly  God  and  truly  man,  consisting  of  a  rea- 
sonable soul  and  body;  consubstantial  with  the  Father 
according  to  the  Godhead,  and  consubstantial  with  us 
according  to  the  manhood;  in  all  things  like  unto  us, 
siu  only  excepted;  who  was  begotten  of  the  Father  be- 
fore all  ages,  according  to  the  Godhead;  and  in  the  last 
days,  the  same  was  born  according  to  the  manhood,  of 
Mary  the  Virgin,  mother  of  God,  for  us  and  for  our 
salvation;  who  is  to  be  acknowledged  one  and  the  same 
Christ,  the  Son,  the  Lord,  the  only  begotten  in  two  na- 
tures, without  mixture,  change,  division  or  separation; 
the  difference  of  natures  not  being  removed  by  their 
union,  but  rather  the  propriety  of  each  nature  being 
preserved,  and  concurring  in  one  person  and  in  one 
tjxoffraffiz,  so  that  he  is  not  divided  or  separated  into 
two  persons,  but  the  only  Son,  God,  the  Word,  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  and  one  and  the  same  person."  At  the 
later  sessions  (ix.-xv.),  a  number  of  questions  of  order, 
supremacy,  discipline,  etc.,  were  settled.  But,  by  far, 
the  most  important  was  the  twenty-eighth  canon,  session 
xv.,  by  which  the  patriarch  of  Constantinople  was  placed 
on  equality  of  authority  with  the  bishop  of  Rome,  sav- 
ing only  to  the  latter  priority  of  honor.  The  Roman 
delegates  protested  against  this,  and,  after  its  adoption, 
Leo  constantly  opposed  it,  upon  the  plea  that  it  contra- 
dicted the  sixth  of  Niceea,  which  assigned  the  second 
place  in  dignity  to  Alexandria;  however,  in  spite  ol  his 
opposition  and  that  of  his  successors,  the  canon  remain- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  227 

ed  and  was  executed.   The  acts  of  this  council  in  Greek, 
with  the  exception  of  the  anathemas,  are  lost. 

THE  SECOND  COUNCIL  OF  NICE. 

This  is  called  the  seventh  oecumenical  council,  though 
falsely  so,  as  some  assert.  It  assembled  August  17,  786, 
by  order  of  the  Empress  Irene  and  her  son  Constantine. 
Owing  to  the  tumults  raised  by  the  Iconoclastic  party, 
it  was  dissolved  and  reconvened  on  September  24,  787. 
(Tlieophanes,  who  was  present,  says  that  the  opening  of 
the  council  was  made  on  October  11.)  There  were  pres- 
ent 375  bishops  from  Greece,  Thrace,  Natolia,  the  Isles 
of  the  Archipelago,  Sicily  and  Italy.  Pope  Hadrian 
and  all  the  Oriental  patriarchs  sent  legates  to  represent 
them  in  the  synod,  those  of  Rome  taking  the  first  place; 
two  commissioners  from  the  emperor  and  empress  also 
assisted  at  it.  The  causes  wljich  led  to  the  assembling 
of  this  council  were  briefly  as  follows:  The  Emperor 
Leo  (and  afterwards  his  son  Constantine  Copronymns), 
offended  at  the  excess  of  veneration  often  offered  to  the 
images  of  Christ  and  the  saints,  made  a  decree  against 
the  use  of  images  in  any  way,  and  caused  them  every- 
where to  be  removed  and  destroyed.  These  severe  and 
summary  proceedings  raised  an  opposition  almost  as  vio- 
lent, and  both  the  patriarch  of  Constantinople  (Ger- 
manus)  and  the  Pope  (Hadrian)  defended  the  use  of 
images,  declaring  them  to  have  been  always  in  use  in 
the  churches,  and  showing,  or  attempting  to  show,  the 
difference  between  absolute  and  relative  worship.  How- 
ever, in  a  council  assembled  at  Constantinople  in  754, 
composed  of  338  bishops,  a  decree  was  published  against 
the  use  of  images.  But  at  this  time  Constantine  Co- 
pronymus  died,  and  Tarasius,  patriarch  of  Constanti- 
nople, induced  the  Empress  Irene  and  her  son  Constan- 


228  HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 

tine  to  convoke  this  council,  in  which  the  decrees  of  the 
council  of  754  at  Constantinople  were  set  aside. 

The  first  session  was  held  in  the  church  of  St.  Sophia. 
Tarasius,  the  patriarch,  spoke  first,  and  exhorted  the 
bishops  to  reject  all  novelties,  and  to  cling  to  the  tradi- 
tions of  the  Church.  After  this,  ten  bishops  were  brought 
before  the  council,  accused  of  following  the  party  of  the 
Iconoclasts  (image  breakers) — three  of  whom,  Basil  of 
Ancyra,  Theodore  of  Myra,  and  Theodosius  of  Amor- 
ium,  recanted,  and  declared  that  they  received  with  all 
honor  the  relics  and  sacred  images  of  Jesus  Christ,  the 
blessed  Virgin,  and  the  saints;  upon  which  they  were 
permitted  to  take  their  seats;  the  others  were  remand- 
ed to  the  next  session.  The  forty-second  of  the  apos- 
tolic canons,  and  the  eighth  of  the  Nicrea,  and  other 
canons  relating  to  the  reception  of  converted  heretics, 
were  read. 

In  the  second  session,  the  letters  of  Pope  Hadrian  to 
the  empress  and  to  the  patriarch  Tarasius  were  read. 
The  latter  then  declared  his  entire  concurrence  in  the 
view  taken  of  the  question  by  the  bishop  of  Rome,  viz: 
that  images  are  to  be  adored  with  a" relative  worship," 
reserving  to  God  alone  faith  and  the  worship  of  Latria. 
This  opinion  was  warmly  applauded  by  the  whole  coun- 
cil. 

In  the  third  session,  the  confession  of  Gregory  of  Neo- 
Cresarea,  the  leader  of  the  Iconoclast  party,  was  received, 
and  declared  by  the  council  to  be  satisfactory;  where- 
upon he  was,  after  some  discussion,  admitted  to  take  his 
seat,  and  with  him  the  bishops  mentioned  above.  Then 
the  letters  of  Tarasius  to  the  patriarchs  of  Alexandria, 
Antioch  and  Jerusalem,  and  their  replies,  as  well  as  the 
confession  of  Theodore  of  Jerusalem,  were  read  and  ap- 
proved. The  passages  of  Holy  Scripture  relating  to  the 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  229 

cherubim  which  overshadowed  the  ark  of  the  covenant, 
and  which  ornamented  the  interior  of  the  temple,  were 
read,  together  with  other  passages  taken  from  the  fa- 
thers, showing  that  God  had,  in  other  days,  worked  mir- 
acles by  means  of  images. 

In  the  fifth  session,  the  patriarch  Tarasius  endeavored 
to  show  that  the  innovators,  in  their  attempts  to  destroy 
all  images,  were  following  in  the  steps  of  the  Jews,  pa- 
gans, Manichseans,  and  other  heretics.  The  council  then 
came  to  the  conclusion  that  the  images  should  be  re- 
stored to  their  usual  places,  and  be  carried  in  processions 
as  before. 

In  the  sixth  session,  the  refutation  of  the  definition 
of  faith,  made  in  the  council  of  Iconoclasts  at  Constan- 
tinople, was  read.  They  had  there  declared  that  the 
eucharist  was  the  only  image  allowed  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ;  but  the  fathers  of  the  present  synod,  in  their 
refutation,  maintained  that  the  eucharist  is  nowhere 
spoken  of  as  the  image  of  our  Lord's  body,  but  as  the 
very  body  itself.  After  this,  the  fathers  replied  to  the 
passages  from  Holy  Scripture  and  from  the  fathers 
which  the  Iconoclasts  had  adduced  in  support  of  their 
views,  and,  in  doing  so,  insisted  chiefly  upon  perpetual 
tradition  and  the  infallibility  of  the  Church. 

In  the  seventh  session  a  definition  of  faith  was  read, 
which  was  to  this  effect:  "  We  decide  that  the  holy  im- 
ages, whether  painted  or  graven,  or  of  whatever  kind 
they  may  be,  ought  to  be  exposed  to  view — whether  in 
churches,  upon  sacred  vessels  and  vestments,  upon  walls, 
or  in  private  houses,  or  by  the  wayside;  since  the  oftener 
Jesus  Christ,  his  blessed  mother,  and  the  saints  are  scon 
in  their  images,  the  more  will  man  be  led  to  think  of 
the  originals,  and  to  love  thorn.  Salutation  and  the 
adoration  of  honor  ought  to  be  paid  to  images,  but  not 


230  HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 

the  worship  of  Latria  (adoration  due  to  God  alone), 
which  belongs  to  God  alone ;  nevertheless,  it  is  lawful 
to  burn  lights  before  them,  and  to  incense  them,  as  is 
usually  done  with  the  cross,  the  books  of  the  gospels, 
and  other  sacred  things,  according  to  the  pious  use  of 
the  ancients ;  for  honor  so  paid  to  the  images  is  trans- 
mitted to  the  original,  which  it  represents.  Such  is  the 
doctrine  of  the  holy  fathers  and  the  tradition  of  the 
Catholic  Church;  and  we  order  that  they  who  dare  to 
think  or  teach  otherwise,  if  bishops  or  other  clerks,  shall 
be  deposed;  if  monks  or  laymen,  shall  be  excommuni- 
cated." This  decree  was  signed  by  the  legates  and  all 
the  bishops. 

Another  session  (not  recognized  either  by  Greeks  or 
Latins)  was  held  at  Constantinople,  to  which  place  the 
bishops  had  been  cited  by  the  Empress  Irene,  who  was 
present,  with  her  son  Constantine,  and  addressed  the 
assembly.  The  decree  of  the  council  and  the  passages 
from  the  fathers  read  at  Kicsea  were  repeated,  and  the 
former  was  again  subscribed.  The  council  of  Constan- 
tinople against  image- worship  was  anathematized,  and 
the  memory  of  Germanus  of  Constantinople,  John  of 
Damascus,  and  George  of  Cyprus,  held  up  to  veneration. 
Twenty-two  canons  of  discipline  were  published. 

1.  Insists  upon  the  proper  observation  of  the  canons 
of  the  Church. 

2.  Forbids  to  consecrate  those  who  do  not  know  the 
psalter,  and  will  not  promise  to  observe  the  canons. 

3.  Forbids  princes  to  elect  bishops. 

7.  Forbids  to  consecrate  any  church  or  altar  in  which 
relics  are  not  contained. 

14.  Forbids  those  who  are  not  ordained  to  read  in  the 
synaxis  from  the  Ambon. 

15  and  16.  Forbid  plurality  of  beneficences,  and  lux- 
ury in  dress  among  the  clergy. 

20.  Forbids  double  monasteries,  for  men  and  women. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  231 

This  council  was  not  for  a  long  period  recognized  in 
France.  The  grounds  upon  which  the  French  bishops 
opposed  it  are  contained  in  the  celebrated  Caroline 
Books,  written  by  order  of  Charlemagne.  Their  chief 
objections  were  these:  1.  That  no  Western  bishop*, 
except  the  Pope,  by  his  legates,  were  present;  2.  Th;.t 
the  decision  was  contrary  to  their  custom,  whicli  was  id 
use  images,  but  not  in  any  way  to  worship  them ;  3.  That 
the  council  was  not  assembled  from  all  parts  of  the 
Church,  nor  was  its  decision  in  accordance  with  that  of 
the  Catholic  Church.  The  Caroline  Books  were  answered 
by  Pope  Adrian,  but  with  little  effect,  so  far  as  the 
Gallican  Church  was  concerned,  which  continued  long 
after  this  to  reject  this  council  in  toto. 

LATERAN  COUNCILS. 

Lateran  Councils  is  a  general  name  applied  to  the 
ecclesiastical  councils  that  have  been  convened  in  the 
Lateran  Church  at  Rome,  but  especially  to  the  live  great 
councils  held  there,  and  regarded  by  the  Roman  Cath- 
olics as  oecumenical,  viz:  those  which  were  held  in  the 
years  1123,  1139,  1179,  1215  and  1512-17.  We  have 
only  room  to  notice  the  most  important  of  all  these 
councils,  and  that  with  reference  to  their  principal  en- 
actments and  historical  connections. 

I.  The  council  of  649,  under  Martin  I.,  condemned 
the  Monothelitic  doctrine,  or  that  of  one  will  in  the 
person  of  Christ.  This  view  was  developed  as  a  contin- 
uation of  the  Monophysite  controversy.  The  council 
of  Chalcedon,  in  451,  had  affirmed  the  existence  of  tu:o 
natures  in  Christ  in  one  person,  against  the  Antiochians, 
the  Nestorians  and  Eutychians.  This  determination 
of  the  council  did  not  obtain  final  supremacy  in  the 
Greek  and  Latin  Churches  till  after  the  time  of  Justin- 


232  HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 

ian,  and  the  conflict  with  it  was  continued  under  various 
forms.  From  the  council  of  Chalcedon  till  that  of  Frank- 
fort, in  793,  the  Church  councils,  especially,  sought  to 
maintain  the  twofoldness  of  the  nature  of  Christ  asserted 
at  Chalcedon,  with  less  regard  to  the  unity,  which  was 
at  the  same  time  established.  An  early  source  for  the 
rise  of  Monoth elitism,  appeared  in  the  writings  of  Pseudo- 
Dionysius  the  Areopagite,  which,  originating  in  the 
fourth  century,  probably  obtained  for  many  centuries 
thereafter  great  credit  in  the  Church.  A  Neo-Platonic 
mysticism  in  these  writings  seeks  to  mediate  between 
the  prevalent  Church  doctrine  and  Monophysitism  (or 
the  doctrine  of  one  nature  in  Christ).  "The  Areopagite 
is  not  an  outspoken  Monophysite,  and  yet  with  him  the 
human  in  Christ  is  only  a  form  of  the  divine,  and  there 
is  in  all  the  acts  of  Christ  but  one  mode  of  operation,  the 
theandric  energy"  (mi a  theandrikee  henergeia).  This  ex- 
pression became  a  favorite  one  with  all  the  Monophysite 
opponents  of  the  Chalcedonian  decisions. 

The  Monothelitic  controversy  proper  extends  from 
623  to  680,  at  which  latter  date  the  synod  of  Constan- 
tinople gave  the  most  precise  definition  of  two  wills  in 
the  nature  of  Christ.  "The  earlier  stage  of  the  contro- 
versy, extending  to  the  year  638,  concerns  rather  the 
question  of  one  or  two  energies  or  modes  of  working  in 
the  acts  of  Christ."  The  Emperor  Heraclius,  on  the 
occasion  of  his  reconquering  the  Eastern  provinces  from 
the  Persians  in  the  year  622,  and  there  coming  in  con- 
tact with  certain  Monophysite  bishops,  conceived  the  idea 
of  reconciling  them  to  the  Church,  by  authorizing  the 
expression  in  reference  to  the  acts  of  Christ  which  was 
used  by  Dionysius.  Sergius,  patriarch  of  Constantino- 
ple, being  consulted,  admitted  the  propriety  of  the  ex- 
pression as  one  sanctioned  by  the  fathers,  and  recom- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  233 

mended  it  to  Cyrus,  bishop  of  Phasis,  who,  being  made 
soon  after  bishop  of  Alexandria,  set  up  a  compromise 
for  the  Mouophysites  with  the  council  of  Chalcedon  on 
nine  points.  Sophronius,  a  monk  of  Alexandria,  seri- 
ously objected  to  the  course  taken  by  Sergius,  and,  on 
being  made  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  became  so  strong  an 
opponent  that  Sergius  called  to  his  aid  the  influence  of 
Llonorius,  bishop  of  Rome,  who  expressed  himself  in 
favor  of  the  view,  "rather  one  will  than  of  one  opera 
tion,"  but  advised  that  controversy  be  avoided.  "It  is 
unquestionably  the  fact  that  the  expressed  views  of 
Honorius,  though  a  Pope,  were  subsequently  condemn- 
ed in  council."  By  occasion  of  the  more  decided  op- 
position of  Sophronius,  the  Emperor  Heraclius,  under 
advice  of  Sergius,  issued  his  edict,  the  Ecthesis,  in  638, 
in  which  he  forbade  the  use  of  cither  expression,  "one 
mode  of  working,"  or  "two  modes  of  working-,"  in  a 
controversial  way;  but  especially  prohibited  the  latter, 
since  it  is  evident  that  Christ  can  have  but  one  will,  the 
human  being  subordinate  to  the  divine.  This  was  dis- 
tinct Monothelitism,  A  powerful  opponent  of  this  view 
was  the  monk  Maxim  us,  whose  writings  had  a  control- 
ling influence  with  the  Lateran  Council.  "lie  assorts 
that  for  the  work  of  redemption  a  completeness  in  the 
two  natures  of  Christ  is  necessary;  there  must  be  a 
complete  human  will.  The  Lor/os,  indeed,  works  all 
through  the  human  working  and  willing.  There  is  a 
thcandric  energy  in  his  own  sense.  It  is  rather  as  a 
tropos  antidoseos,  or  what  was  subsequently  called  the 
communicatio  idiomatum." 

Maximus  worked  with  great  zeal  against  Monothe- 
litism in  Rome  and  in  Africa,  sending  out  thence  tracts 
on  the  subject  into  the  Eastern  countries.      Sophronius 
still   carried    on    the   controversy,    as    also,  with   him, 
20 


234  HISTORY  OF  CilURCH  COUNCILS. 

Stephen,  bishop  of  Doria,  his  pupil.  After  the  death 
of  Ilonorius,  in  638,  the  bishops  of  Rome  were  decidedly 
opposed  to  Moiiothelitism,  and  Martin  I.,  who  had  zeal- 
ously contended  against  the  view  while  representative 
of  the  Roman  Church  at  Constantinople,  became,  when 
made  Pope  in  649,  the  chief  pillar  of  the  contrary  opin- 
ion. Advocates  of  the  view  enunciated  in  the  Ecthesis 
of  Heraclius  were  Theodore,  bishop  of  Phasau,  and 
Pyrrhus,  of  Constantinople.  In  648,  the  Emperor  Con- 
stans  II.,  under  the  influence  of  the  patriarch  Paul,  is- 
sued his  Type  (ru/roc  Trforsoc),  which,  though  not  so  de- 
cidedly Monothelitic  as  the  Ecthesis,  condemns,  under 
threat  of  the  severest  penalties,  any  further  controversy 
upon  the  subject.  Without  consulting  the  emperor, 
Martin  I.  now  convoked  this  first  Lateran  Council,  in 
which  he  presided  over  about  104  bishops  from  Italy, 
Sicily,  Sardinia  and  Africa.  The  Pope  sought  to  ob- 
tain generally  recognition  for  the  council,  and  it  was 
finally  everywhere  received  with  the  five  oecumenical 
councils.  Five  sessions  were  held;  the  writings  of  the 
prominent  Monothelites  were  examined  and  condemned; 
Pope  Martin  explained  the  proper  meaning  of  Diony- 
sius'  term  "theandric  operation,"  stating  that  it  was 
designed  to  signify  two  operations  of  one  person;  the 
Ecthesis  of  Heraclius  and  Type  of  Constans  were  con- 
demned; and  the  judgment  of  the  council  pronounced 
in  twenty  canons,  which  "anathematize  all  who  do  not 
confess  in  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  two  wills  and  two 
operations." 

II.  The  councils  of  1105, 1112  and  1116,  under  Pascal 
II. ,  concern  the  contest  about  investitures  between  the 
Pope  and  the  emperor,  which  was  brought  to  a  close  in 
the  council  of  1123,  called  and  presided  over  by  Calix- 
tus  II.  This  body  consisted  of  300  bishops  and  600 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  235 

abbots,  all  of  the  Latin  Church.  The  investiture  con- 
test, which  began  as  early  as  1054,  when,  by  mutual  de- 
crees of  excommunication,  the  breach  between  the  east- 
ern and  western  churches  was  made  final,  arose  from 
the  claim  made  by  the  German  emperors  to  an  inherit- 
ance of  rights,  exercised  by  the  Greek  emperors,  con- 
cerning the  appointment  of  candidates  to  ecclesiastical 
offices,  and  their  investiture  with  the  right  to  hold 
church  property  as  subjects  of  the  empire.  Under  the 
new  German  empire,  from  Otho  the  Great  to  Henry  IV., 
936-1056,  the  popes  themselves  were  confirmed  in  their 
seats  by  the  emperor.  Henry  III.  obtained  from  the 
Council  of  Sutry,  which  was  held  near  Rome,  in  the 
midst  of  his  own  army,  in  1046,  the  power  of  nominat- 
ing the  popes,  without  intervention  of  clergy  or  people. 
The  influence  of  Hildebrand  was  now  felt — an  influence 
which  he  had  begun  to  exert  from  the  time  of  Leo  IX., 
in  1048,  and  which  secured  from  Nicolas  II.  (1063)  a  de- 
cree transferring  the  election  of  popes  to  a  conclave  of 
cardinals.  Hildebrand,  as  Gregory  VII.,  maintained  a 
celebrated  contest  with  Henry  IV.,  to  whom,  in  1075,  he 
forbade  all  power  of  investiture,  excommunicating  the 
emperor  the  next  year,  and  causing  him  to  do  penance 
at  Canossa.  With  his  victorious  campaign  in  Italy 
(1080-83)  Henry  drove  the  Pope  into  exile  at  Salerno, 
where  he  soon  after  died. 

His  immediate  successors,  however,  were  such  as  he 
had  designated  for  the  post,  and  were  the  inheritors  of 
his  doctrines  and  plans  for  the  supremacy  of  the  church. 
Urban  II.  sent  forth  an  encyclical,  declaring  his  adhe- 
sion to  the  principles  of  Gregory — the  Dictatus  Greqorii; 
and  Pascal  II.  (1099-1118),  who  had  been  one  of  Greg- 
ory's cardinals,  showed  more  zeal  than  firmness  in  the 
same  course.  In  the  Lateran  Council  under  the  Pope 


236  HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 

(1105),  an  oath  of  obedience  to  the  Pope  was  taken  by 
the  clergy,  and  a  promise  rendered  to  affirm  whatever 
he  and  the  church  in  council  should  affirm.  The  Count 
De  Meulan  and  his  confederates  were  excommunicated 
for  having  encouraged  the  King  of  England  in  his  con- 
duct concerning  investitures.  Henry  V.,  who,  in  the 
rebellion  against  his  father,  was  encouraged  by  Pascal, 
would  nevertheless  yield  nothing  on  becoming  emperor 
(1105),  in  the  matter  of  investitures;  his  example  being 
followed  in  this  respect  by  France  and  England.  Henry 
marched  into  Italy  and  imprisoned  the  Pope  in  the  year 
1111,  forcing  from  him  the  concession  of  rendering  back 
to  the  emperor  the  n'efs  of  the  bishops,  on  condition 
that  there  should  be  no  imperial  interference  with  the 
elections.  For  his  weakness  in  this  and  in  other  points, 
the  Pope  was  bitterly  reproached,  and  the  council  of 
1112  revoked  all  these  concessions  and  excommunicated 
the  emperor.  Notwithstanding  the  rebellion  of  his 
German  subjects,  Henry  collected  an  army  and  invaded 
Italy  anew  in  1116.  The  council  convoked  the  same 
year,  thereupon  renewed  the  revocation  of  the  conces- 
sions which  Pascal  had  formerly  made,  and  anathema- 
tized the  emperor.  At  last,  the  German  people,  weary 
of  the  conflict  between  Church  and  State,  brought  a 
peaceful  compromise  in  the  concordat  at  the  imperial 
diet  of  Worms,  in  1122.  The  principles  of  this  con- 
cordat were  adopted  by  the  council  of  1123.  The  terms 
of  the  compact  are  as  follows: 

"The  emperor  surrenders  to  God,  to  St.  Peter  and 
Paul,  and  to  the  Catholic  Church,  all  right  of  investi- 
ture by  king  and  staff.  He  grants  that  elections  and 
ordinances  in  all  churches  shall  take  place  freely  in  ac- 
cordance with  ecclesiastical  laws.  The  Pope  agrees  that 
the  election  of  German  prelates  shall  be  had  in  the  pres- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  237 

ence  of  the  emperor,  provided  it  is  without  violence  or 
simony.  In  case  any  election  is  disputed,  the  emperor 
shall  render  assistance  to  the  legal  party,  with  the  ad- 
vice of  the  archbishop  and  the  bishops.  The  person 
elected  is  invested  with  the  imperial  fief  by  the  royal 
scepter  pledged  for  the  execution  of  everything  required 
by  law.  Whoever  is  consecrated  shall  also  receive  in 
like  manner  his  investiture  from  other  parts  of  the 
empire  within  six  months."  (Hase,  Church  History,  p. 
200;  Gieseler,  Eccles.  Hist.,  iii.,  181  sq.)  The  Pope  here 
made  considerable  concessions  in  form,  but  actually, 
through  his  influence,  obtained  all  power  at  the  elec- 
tions. The  council  of  1123  also  renewed  the  grant  of 
indulgences  promulgated  by  Urban  II.  in  promotion  of 
the  first  crusade  in  1095,  and  decreed  the  celibacy  of  the 
clergy.  Twenty-two  canons  of  discipline  were  enacted. 
III.  The  council  of  1139,  under  Innocent  II.,  con- 
demned the  anti-pope  Anacletus  II.,  with  his  adher- 
ents, and  deposed  all  who  had  received  office  under 
him.  On  the  same  day  with  the  installation  of  Inno- 
cent II.,  in  1130,  Peter  of  Leon,  a  cardinal,  and  grand- 
son of  a  rich  Jewish  banker,  had  been  proclaimed  Pope 
as  Anacletus  II.,  by  a  majority  of  the  cardinals.  Inno- 
cent took  refuge  in  France,  where  he  was  supported  by 
the  king.  His  cause  was  very  warmly  espoused  by 
Bernard  of  Clairvaux,  through  whose  influence  chiefly 
Innocent  recovered  his  position  in  Italy,  and  marched 
into  Rome  triumphantly  with  Lothaire  II.,  in  1136. 
Anacletus  died  in  1138,  and  a  successor  was  chosen  by 
his  party  only  with  the  purpose  of  making  peace.  Roger 
of  Sicily  had  supported  Anacletus,  and  was  on  this  ac- 
count condemned  in  the  council  of  1139,  though  the 
origin  of  the  kingdom  of  the  Two  Sicilies  belongs  to 
the  same  year,  Roger  having  taken  Innocent  prisoner, 


238  HISTORY  OF  CllURCII  COUNCILS. 

and  having  compelled  the  Pope  to  bestow  upon  him  the 
investiture  of  this  kingdom.  At  this  council  Arnold  of 
Brescia  was  also  condemned.  This  was  a  young  clergy- 
man of  the  city  of  Brescia,  a  disciple  of  Abelard,  who, 
inspired  by  the  free  philosophical  spirit  of  his  master, 
devoted  himself  to  the  promotion  of  practical  reform  in 
Church  and  State.  A  marked  spirit  of  political  inde- 
pendence wa's  manifesting  itself  about  this  time  in  Lom- 
bardy,  as  an  inheritance  from  the  old  Roman  municipal- 
ities established  there.  The  popes,  from  the  days  of  Leo 
IX.,  had  themselves  inspired  movements  of  ecclesiastical 
reform.  Pascal  II.  had  admitted  that  the  secular  power 
of  the  bishops  interfered  with  their  spiritual  duties. 
Bernard,  though  a  zealous  opponent  of  Arnold,  yet 
writes  as  follows  in  his  Contemplations  on  the  Papacy: 
"Who  can  mention  the  place  where  one  of  the  apostles 
ever  held  a  trial,  decided  disputes  about  boundaries,  or 
portioned  out  lands?"  "I  read  that  the  apostles  stood 
before  judgment  seats,  not  sat  on  them." 

Arnold  preached  with  great  zeal  against  the  political 
power  and  wealth  of  the  clergy.  "The  church  ought 
rather  to  rejoice,"  he  said,  "in  an  apostolic  poverty." 
He  was  driven  successively  from  Italy,  France  and 
Switzerland,  but  in  1139  was  recalled  to  Rome  by  the 
populace,  who  sought  to  revive  the  sovereignty,  the 
State,  established  a  Senate,  limited  the  Pope  to  the  ex- 
ercise of  spiritual  power,  and  the  possession  of  volun- 
tary ofi'orings,  and  invited  the  German  emperor  to  make 
Rome  his  capital.  Arnold  and  his  "politicians"  at 
Rome  thus  gave  Pope  Innocent  and  his  immediate  suc- 
cessors— Lucius  II.,  Eugenius  III.,  and  Adrian  IV. — 
more  trouble  than  any  political  movements  elsewhere. 
This  condemnation  at  the  council  did  not  effectually  di- 
minish his  power.  When,  however,  Adrian,  in  1154, 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  239 

put  the  city  of  Rome  under  ban,  and  prohibited  all  pub- 
lic worship,  Arnold  was  abandoned  by  the  Senate,  sac- 
rificed by  Frederick  I.,  ancl  hung  at  Home  in  1155,  his 
body  being  burned  and  thrown  into  the  river  Tiber. 
Among  the  canons  of  the  council,  the  twenty-third  con- 
demns the  heresy  of  the  Mauichseans,  as  the  followers 
of  Peter  de  Brins  were  called.  This  heresy  was  at- 
tributed to  the  early  Waldensians  in  France  and  else- 
where, arising  partly  from  their  ascetic  mode  of  life. 
About  1,000  prelates  were  present  at  this  council;  thirty 
canons  of  discipline  were  published,  and  among  them 
reaffirmations  of  former  canons  against  simony,  and 
concubinage  in  the  clergy. 

IV.  The  council  of  1179,  under  Alexander  III.,  num- 
bering 280,  mostly  Latin  bishops,  was  called  to  correct 
certain  abuses  which  had  arisen  during  the  long  schism 
just  brought  to  a  close  by  the  peace  of  Venice,  1177. 
Until  near  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century  the  popes 
were  bard  pressed  by  Hokenstauffen  emperors.  It  is 
the  contest  of  Gbibelline  and  Guclph.  Frederick  I.  had 
taken  umbrage  at  the  use  of  the  term  "beneficium,"  in 
a  letter  addressed  to  him  by  Adrian  IV.,  about  the  rude- 
ness of  German  knights  to  pilgrims  visiting  Rome,  as  if 
the  Pope  meant  to  imply  that  the  imperial  authority 
had  been  conferred  by  him.  The  emperor  marched  into 
Italy,  and  other  letters  were  interchanged  between  him 
and  the  Pope,  when,  upon  the  death  of  Adrian,  in  1159, 
the  two  parties — the  hierarchic  and  the  moderate  among 
the  cardinals — chose  two  opposing  popes,  viz.:  Alexan- 
der III.  and  Victor  IV.  The  Emperor's  Council,  called 
at  Pavia  in  1160,  recognized  the  latter.  Pascal  III.  and 
Calixtus  III.  followed  at  the  imperial  dictation,  with  but 
little  influence.  Alexander,  from  bis  refuge  in  France, 
enjoyed  great  popularity.  lie  bad  on  his  side  the  Loin- 


240  HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 

bard  League.  The  cause  of  Frederick  was  defended  by 
the  lawyers  of  Bologna,  who  ascribed  to  him  unlimited 
power,  to  the  prejudice  of  the  people.  Defeated  at 
Legnano,  in  1176,  the  emperor  subscribed,  at  the  dicta- 
tion of  Alexander,  the  peace  of  Venice,  the  provisions 
of  which  were  based  on  the  concordat  of  Worms.  The 
first  and  most  important  of  the  twenty-seven  canons  es 
tablished  by  this  council,  which  were  mostly  disciplin- 
ary, provides  that  henceforth  "  the  election  of  the  popes 
shall  be  confined  to  the  college  of  cardinals,  and  two- 
thirds  of  the  votes  shall  be  required  to  make  a  lawful 
election,  instead  of  a  majority  only,  as  heretofore.  It 
was  by  this  council  also  that  the  "errors  and  impieties" 
of  the  "Waldenses  and  Albigenses  were  declared  heret- 
ical. At  the  unimportant  council  of  1167  Pope  Alex- 
ander excommunicated  Frederick  I. 

V.  The  council  of  1215,  under  Innocent  III.,  was  the 
most  important  of  all  the  Lateran  Councils.  It  is  usu- 
ally styled  the  Fourth  Lateran.  It  continued  in  session 
from  November  11  to  Xovembor  30,  there  being  present 
71  archbishops,  412  bishops,  800  abbots,  the  patriarchs 
of  Constantinople  and  Jerusalem,  and  the  legates  of 
other  patriarchs  and  crowned  heads.  The  Pope  opened 
the  convocation  with  a  sermon  on  Luke  xxii.  15,  relat- 
ing to  the  recovery  of  the  Holy  Land  and  the  reforma- 
tion of  the  church.  The  remarkable  power  of  Innocent 
III.  is  displayed  in  his  influence  over  this  council,  which 
was  submissive  to  all  his  wishes,  and  received  the  sev- 
enty canons  proposed  by  him.  The  papal  prerogatives 
attained  their  greatest  supremacy  in  Innocent,  whose 
pontificate  extended  from  1198  to  1216.  The  bull,  Unam 
Sanctam,  of  Boniface  Till.,  directed  against  Philip  the 
Fair  in  1302,  marks  the  limit  from  which  the  power  of 
the  popes  evidently  began  to  decline.  Innocent  III.,  a 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  241 

man  of  great  personal  influence,  of  marked  ability  as  a 
writer  and  orator,  bold,  crafty,  and  ever  watchful  of  the 
affairs  of  Church  and  State,  had  his  eye  on  all  that 
transpired  through  his  legates.  The  chief  objects  which 
his  pontificate  sought  were,  first,  "the  strengthening  of 
the  States  of  the  Church;  second,  separation  of  the  two 
Sicilies  from  all  dependence  on  the  German  empire; 
third,  the  liberation  of  Italy  from  all  foreign  control; 
fourth,  the  exercise  of  guardianship  over  the  confeder- 
acy of  its  States;  fifth,  the  liberation  of  the  Oriental 
Church;  sixth,  the  extermination  of  heretics,  and,  sev- 
enth, the  exercise  of  ecclesiastical  discipline."  (Ilase, 
Church  Hist.,  p.  207.) 

Hitherto  England,  Germany  and  France  had  consti- 
tuted a  balance  of  power  against  the  Pope,  but  under 
Innocent  the  two  former,  as  well  as  Italy,  submitted  to 
the  claims  of  the  pseudo-Isodorean  decretals.  France 
was  early  laid  under  interdict  (1200),  on  account  of 
Philip  Agustus' repudiation  of  Ingeburge  and  the  French 
bishop's  approval  of  the  act,  while  John  of  England  was 
deprived  of  his  realm,  to  receive  it  back  (in  1213)  only 
as  a  fief  of  Rome.  Deciding  at  first  for  Otto  IV.,  the 
Guelph,  against  the  Hohenstaufi'en  Philip,  in  Germany, 
Innocent  subsequently  secured  from  the  council  the  rec- 
ognition of  Frederick  II.,  vainly  seeking  in  this  his 
German  policy  to  free  Italy  entirely  from  the  power  of 
the  emperor.  The  famous  seventy  constitutions  of  In- 
nocent, if  not  discussed  in  a  conciliatory  manner,  by  the 
bishops,  or  passed  with  every  form  of  enactment,  were 
nevertheless  regarded  as  the  canons  of  the  council,  so 
recognized  by  the  Council  of  Trent,  and  by  church  au- 
thorities of  the  intervening  age,  and  they  have  consti- 
tuted a  fundamental  law  for  many  well-known  practices 
of  the  church.  The  first  of  these  canons  asserts  the 
21 


242  HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 

• 

Catholic  faith  in  the  unity  of  God  against  the  Manichsean 
sects.  It  also,  for  the  first  time,  makes  the  doctrine  of 
substantiation,  in  the  use  of  this  express  term,  an  article 
of  faith.  "The  body  and  blood  of  Jesus  Christ  in  the 
sacrament  of  the  altar  are  truly  contained  under  the 
species  of  bread  and  wine,  the  bread  being,  by  the  di- 
vine omnipotence,  transubstantiated  into  his  body,  and 
the  wine  into  his  blood."  The  second  canon  condemns 
the  treatise  of  Joachim,  the  prophet  of  Calabria,  which 
he  wrote  against  Peter  Lombard  on  the  subject  of  the 
Trinity. 

The  third  canon  is  of  great  importance,  furnishing  the 
basis  for  the  crusade  against  the  Albigenses,  and  for  all 
severities  of  a  like  character  on  the  part  of  the  Romish 
Church.  It  "anathematizes  all  heretics  who  hold  any- 
thing in  opposition  to  the  preceding  exposition  of  faith, 
and  enjoins  that,  after  condemnation,  they  shall  be  de- 
livered over  to  the  secular  arm;  also  excommunicates 
all  who  receive,  protector  maintain  heretics,  and  threat- 
ens with  deposition  all  bishops  who  do  not  use  their  ut 
most  endeavors  to  clear  their  diocese  of  them."  (Laudon, 
Manual  of  Councils,  p.  295.) 

The  fourth  canon  invites  the  Greeks  to  unite  with  and 
submit  themselves  to  the  Romish  Church.  The  fifth  canon, 
regulates  the  order  of  precedence  of  the  patriarchs:  1. 
Rome;  2.  Constantinople;  3.  Alexandria;  4.  Antioch; 
5.  Jerusalem;  and  permits  these  several  patriarchs  to 
give  the  pall  to  the  archbishops  of  their  dependencies, 
exacting  from  themselves  a  profession  of  faith  and  of 
obedience  to  the  Roman  see,  when  they  receive  the  pall 
from  the  Pope.  The  sixth  to  the  twentieth,  inclusive,  are 
of  minor  importance  to  the  Christian  world.  (Landon, 
p.  296).  The  twenty-first  canon  enjoins  "all  the  faithful 
of  both  sexes,  having  arrived  at  years  of  discretion,  to 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS. .  243 

confess  all  their  sins  at  least  once  a  year  to  their  proper 
priest,  and  to  communicate  at  Easter."  This  is  the  first 
canon  known  which  orders  sacramental  confession  gen- 
erally, and  may  have  heen  occasioned  by  the  teaching  of 
the  Waldenses,  that  neither  confession  nor  satisfaction 
was  necessary  in  order  to  obtain  remission  of  sin.  From 
the  words  with  which  it  begins  it  is  known  as  the  canon 
"Omnis  utriusque  sexus,"  and  was  solemnly  reaffirmed  by 
the  Council  of  Trent.  The  canons  (given  completely 
by  Landon,  Manual  of  Councils,  p.  293,  sq.)  in  general 
constitute  a  body  of  full  and  severe  disciplinary  enact- 
ments. This  council  reaffirmed  and  extended  the  "Truce 
of  God"  on  plenary  indulgence  which  had  been  previ- 
ously proclaimed  in  behalf  of  the  eastern  crusades,  and 
fixed  the  time,  June  1,  and  the  place  Sicily,  as  a  rendez- 
vous for  another  crusade. 

This  council  confirmed  Simon  de  Montfort  in  posses- 
sion of  lauds  which  the  crusaders  had  obtained  by  papal 
confiscation  from  the  Waldenses,  and  decreed  the  entire 
extirpation  of  the  heresy.  The  Waldenses  or  Albigenses 
in  the  south  of  France  were  the  followers  of  Peter  Waldo, 
a  wealthy  citizen  of  Lyons,  who,  from  religious  princi- 
ple, adopted  a-life  of  poverty.  His  adherents  were  also 
called  Leonistse  and  "poor  men  of  Lyons."  They  were 
allied  in  their  sentiments  to  the  Vaudois  of  the  Pied- 
montese  valleys,  with  whom  they  became  u  lited  for 
mutual  defense.  They  protested  against  these  points  in 
the  doctrine  of  the  Romish  Church:  First,  transubstun- 
tiation;  second,  the  sacraments  of  confirmation,  confes- 
sion and  marriage;  third,  the  invocation  of  saints;  fourth, 
the  worship  of  images;  fifth,  the  temporal  power  of  the 
clergy.  A  crusade  had  been  instituted  against  them  by 
the  papal  power  in  1178.  Innocent  sought  to  win  them 
over  and  make  monks  of  them  by  establishing,  in  1201, 


244  HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 

the  order  of  "Poor  Catholics."  Unsuccessful  in  this,  he 
confiscated  their  lands  to  the  feudal  lords,  and  estab- 
lished an  inquisition  among  them  under  the  direction  of 
Dominic,  which  was  formally  sanctioned  by  the  council 
under  consideration.  The  warfare  against  them,  incited 
and  directed  by  the  monks  of  Citeaux,  was  allowed  by 
Philip  Augustus.  Count  Raymond,  of  Toulouse,  es- 
poused the  cause  of  his  persecuted  vassals.  The  papal 
legate,  Peter  of  Castelman,  sent  to  convert  the  Waldeu- 
scs,  was  murdered  by  Raymond,  whose  dominions  were 
thereupon  assaulted,  in  1209,  by  a  fiercer  crusade  of  so- 
called  "Christian  Pilgrims,"  led  on  by  Simon  de  Mont- 
fort  and  Arnold,  the  Abbot  of  Citeaux.  The  Count  of 
Toulouse  submitted,  but  a  bloody  warfare  was  prosecuted 
against  Raymond  Roger,  viscount  of  Beziers  and  Albi, 
and  subsequently  200  towns  and  castles,  within  the  boun- 
daries of  the  two  counts,  were  granted  to  the  successful 
Simon  de  Montfort.  A  rebellion,  however,  against  his 
power  deprived  him  of  all;  but  Raymond  of  Toulouse, 
who  appeared  at  the  council  of  1215,  obtained  no  favor, 
and  his  territory  was  declared  to  be  alienated  from  him 
forever. 

VI.  The  Lateran  Council  of  1512-1517,  under  Julius 
II.  and  Leo  X.,  was  convened  for  the  "  reformation  of 
abuses,"  for  the  condemnation  of  the  Council  of  Pisa, 
"and  attained  its  most  important  result  in  the  abolition 
of  the  Pragmatic  Sanction."  France,  under  Louis  XII., 
had  obtained  great  military  successes  in  Italy  by  the 
League  of  Cambray,  formed  in  1509  against  Venice.  In 
the  interests  of  France,  and  by  the  friendship  of  some 
of  the  cardinals,  Louis  XII.  summoned  a  Church  Coun- 
cil at  Pisa,  November,  1511,  which  in  1512  was  moved 
to  Milan,  but  was  entirely  fruitless  of  results,  being  dis- 
solved by  the  presence  of  the  Pope's  army.  Julius  I  . 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  245 

though  at  first  jealous  of  Venice,  had  nevertheless, 
aroused  by  the  successes  of  the  French  general,  formed 
the  Holy  Alliance  with  Venice,  Spain,  England  and 
Switzerland,  and  now,  at  the  head  of  his  army,  drove 
the  French  beyond  the  Alps  and  himself  summoned  a 
council  at  the  Lateran,  May  10,  1512.  This  council  ex- 
tended over  twelve  sessions,  until  March,  1517.  The 
Bishop  of  Guerk  had  actively  promoted  the  summoning 
of  the  council,  and  attended  as  representative  of  the 
German  emperor.  All  the  acts  of  the  Council  of  Pisa 
were  at  once  annulled.  Julius  having  died  in  February, 
1513,  Leo  X.  presided  over  the  sixth  session. 

At  the  eighth  session,  in  December,  1513,  Louis  XII., 
through  his  ambassador,  declared  his  adhesion  to  this 
Council  of  the  Lateran.  At  the  eleventh  session,  in 
December,  1516,  the  bull  was  read  which,  in  place  of  the 
Pragmatic  Sanction  of  Bourges  (1438),  wherein  France 
accepted  the  decisions  of  the  Basle  Council,  in  so  far  as 
they  were  consistent  with  the  liberties  of  the  Gallican 
Church,  substituted  the  concordat  agreed  upon  this  year 
(1516)  between  Leo  X.  and  Francis  I.  Through  hope 
of  increasing  his  power  in  Italy,  Francis  largely  sacri- 
ficed the  liberties  of  the  church.  Several  of  the  articles 
of  the  Pragmatic,  which  had  re-established  the  right  of 
election,  while  the  concordat  declares  that  the  chapters 
of  the  cathedrals  in  France  shall  no  longer  proceed  to 
elect  the  bishop  in  case  of  vacancy,  but  that  the  king 
shall  name  a  proper  person,  whom  the  Pope  shall  nom- 
inate to  the  vacant  see.  The  concordat,  on  account  es- 
pecially of  this  provision,  met  with  great  opposition  in 
the  parliament,  universities  and  the  church  at  Paris.  It 
was  a  great  advance  of  the  papacy  against  the  liberties 
of  France  (Janus,  Pope  and  Council,  xxviii.  and  xxix.). 

Neither  this  council,  nor  the  other  four,  viz.:  those  of 


246  HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 

1123,  1139,  1179  and  1215,  styled  ecumenical  by  the 
Romish  Church,  can  be  properly  regarded  as  such. 
Some  writers  mention  as  the  sixth  Lateran  the  council 
convened  by  Pope  Benedict  XIII.  on  the  bull  Unigenitus, 
and  for  the  purpose  of  general  reform  in  the  church. 

THE    COUNCILS    OF   LYONS. 

Lyons  is  a  city  of  France,  and  is  situated  316  miles 
southeast  of  Paris,  and  is  noted  in  ecclesiastical  history 
as  the  seat  of  t\vo  ecumenical  councils,  the  first  of 
which  was  held  in  1245,  consisting  of  140  bishops,  and 
convened  for  the  purpose  of  promoting  the  crusades,  re- 
storing ecclesiastical  discipline,  and  dethroning  Fred- 
erick II.,  emperor  of  Germany.  It  was  also  decreed  at 
this  council  that  cardinals  should  wear  red  hats. 

At  the  second  council,  held  in  1274,  there  were  500 
bishops  present,  and  about  1,000  "inferior  clergy."  Its 
principal  object  was  the  reunion  of  the  Greek  and  Latin 
Churches.  The  first  of  these  councils  was  held  under 
the  pontificate  of  Innocent  IV.,  and  the  second  under 
the  pontificate  of  Gregory  X. 

COUNCILS    OF    VIENNE. 

Vienne  is  a  city  of  Dauphine, France,  where  numerous 
Church  councils  were  held. 

I.  The  first  of  which  mention  is  made  was  held  in 
474;  of  its  transactions  nothing  is  known  beyond  the 
fact  that   it  sanctioned  the  solemn  observance  of  the 
three    days    preceding   Ascension-day,    which    Bishop 
Mamercus,  of  Vienne,  had  ordered. 

II.  The  one  held  in  870  simply  confirmed  the  priv- 
ileges bestowed  upon  a  monastery. 

III.  Held  in  892,  by  order  of  Pope  Formosus,  whose 
two  legates,  Pascal  and  John,  presided.    Several  bishops 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  247 

were  present,  and  the  following  canons  were  published: 

1,  2.  Excommunicate  those  who  seize  the  property  of 
the  Church,  or  maltreat  clerks. 

4.  Forbids  laymen  to  present  to  churches  without  the 
consent  of  the  bishop  of  the  diocese ;  also  forbids  them 
to  take  any  present  from  those  whom  they  present. 
(Mausi,  Condi  ix,  433). 

IV.  Held  in  907 ;  was  concocted  by  Archbishop 
Alexander,  of  Vienne,  and  adjusted  a  dispute  between 
Abbots  Aribert  and  Barnard  respecting  the  income  re- 
ceipts of  monasteries. 

Y.  Held  in  1112  by  Archbishop  Guido  ;  excommuni- 
cated Emperor  Henry  V.,  because  he  claimed  the  right  ot 
episcopal  investiture,  and  revoked  the  treaty  of  1111 
which  conferred  such  right  upon  the  crown. 

VI.  Held  in  1119;  was  called  by  Pope  Gelasius  II., 
who  had  again  excommunicated  Henry  V.,  on  the  oc- 
casion of  his  setting  up  an  anti-pope  in  the  person  of 
Gregory  VIII. ;  but  nothing  whatever  concerning  the 
transactions  of  this  synod  is  known. 

VII.  Held  in  1124;  was  incited  by  Pope  Calixtus  II., 
and  called  by  Archbishop  Peter,  of  Vienne  ;  legislated 
with  reference  to  the  securing  of  ecclesiastical  privileges 
and  possessions. 

VIII.  Held  in  1142  ;  was  chiefly  concerned  with  the 
election  of  a  new  bishop. 

IX.  Held  in  1164,  at  which  Archbishop  Reginald,  of 
Cologne,  vainly  endeavored   to  secure  a  recognition  of 
Paschal  III.,  whom  the  Emperor  Frederick  had  endorsed. 

X.  Held   in    1199,   by    the    Cardinal-legate   Peter    of 
Capua,  for  the  purpose  of  promulgating  the  decree  of 
Pope  Innocent  III.,  which    punished  the  King    Philip 
Augustus  with   excommunication  on  account  of  his  re- 
nunciation of  Inneburgis,  his  lawful  consort;  and   his 


248  HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 

subsequent  marriage  with   Agnes,  of  Meraii.      (Mansi 
Condi  xi,  11). 

XI.  Held  in  1289  ;  is  barely  mentioned  in  the  records, 
and  some  authorities  deny  that  it  was  held. 

XII.  Held  in  1311 ;  known  as  the  fifteenth  secumeni- 
cal  council,  and  the  only  one  of  the  series  to  which  at- 
taches any  considerable  importance.     It  was  originally 
ordered,  by  a  papal  bull  of  1308,  to  meet  Oct.  1,  1310, 
but  was  subsequently  postponed   for  one   year.       The 
council  finally  convened  under  the  presidency  of  Pope 
Clement  V.,  October  16,  1311.    The  number  of  prelates 
present  is  fixed  by  some  at  114,  and  by  others  at  300,  in- 
cluding the  patriarchs  of  the  Latin  Rite  of  Alexandria 
and  Antioch.     It  discussed  methods  for  preserving  the 
purity  of  the  faith,  which  was  impaired  by  the  heretical 
influence   of  John,    of  Olivia,    and   of  the   Fratricelli, 
Dolcinists,  Beghards  and  Begums  ;  also  the  aid  to  be 
afforded  the   Holy  Land ;  the  reform  of  ecclesiastical 
discipline ;  and  especially  the  disposition  to  be  made  of 
the  Order  of  Knights  Templars.   The  decision  abrogated 
the  Order  of  Templars;  declared  the  legitimacy  of  the 
late  Pope  Boniface  VIII.,  and  his   freedom   from  the 
crimes  charged    against   him;    conceded   titles   for  six 
years  to  the  kings  of  France,  England  and  Navarre,  in 
order  that  they  might  organize  a  crusade;  and  regulated 
the   government    of    the    begging    friars   and    similar 
matters.     Most  of  the  decrees  which  have  to  do  with 
matters  of  doctrine  and  discipline  are  contained  in  the 
so-called    Clementines,    and  were   first   promulgated   by 
Pope  John  XXII.     (London  Manual  of  Councils ,  5  v.). 

XIII.  Held  in  1557;  it  determined  several  questions 
of  Church  discipline;  discussed  the  use  of  sermons  as  a 
means  of  instructing  the  people;  forbade  the  admission 
of  strangers  to  the  pulpits;  demanded  the  rendition  of 


REFORMATORY   MOVEMENTS.  2-19 

heretics;  and  prohibited  merry-makings  on  feast-days 
and  association  with  suspected  persons  ;  gave  directions 
concerning  the  tonsure  and  garb  of  priests;  denied  to 
monks  and  nuns  the  privilege  of  leaving  their  convents, 
etc.  (Martine  Thesaur.  Novus  Anecdot  —  Lutet  Par. 
1717,  iv,  446  sq.). 

COUNCIL  OF  CONSTANCE. 

This  council  was  summoned  at  the  dictation  of  Pope 
John  XXIII.,  in  accordance  with  the  writ  of  the  Em- 
peror Sigismund,  and  continued  its  sessions  from  1414 
to  1418.  One  of  its  professed  objects  was  to  put  an  cud 
to  the  schism  which  had  lasted  for  thirty  years,  and 
which  was  caused  by  the  several  claimants  for  the  pon- 
tificate. At  this  time,  besides  John  (Balthasar  Cossa), 
two  others  claimed  the  title  of  pope,  viz.,  Pedro  of 
Luna,  a  native  of  Catalonia,  who  styled  himself  Bene- 
dict XIII.,  and  Angelo  Corrario,  a  Venetian,  who  as- 
sumed the  name  of  Gregory  XII.  Another  object  of 
the  council  was  to  take  cognizance  of  the  so-called  her- 
esies of  Huss  and  Wicklift'e.  The  council  was  called  to 
meet  at  Constance  on  the  festival  of  All-Saints,  in  1414, 
and  so  great  was  the  influx  of  people,  that  it  was  esti- 
mated that  not  less  than  30,000  horses  were  brought  to 
Constance,  which  may  give  some  idea  of  the  immense 
multitude  of  human  beings.  It  is  stated  that  during 
the  session,  the  Emperor,  the  Pope,  twenty  princes,  140 
counts,  more  than  twenty  cardinals,  seven  patriarchs, 
twenty  archbishops,  ninety-one  bishops,  600  other  cleri- 
cal dignitaries,  and  about  4000  priests,  were  present  at  this 
celebrated  convocation.  The  pretended  heresies  of  "\Vick- 
liffe  and  IIuss  were  here  condemned,  and  the  latter,  not- 
withstanding the  assurances  of  safety  given  him  by  the 
Emperor, was  burnt  at  the  stake  July  6, 1415,  and  his  friend 


250  HISTORY  OF  CHURCII  COUNCILS. 

and  companion,  Jerome  of  Prague,  met  with  the  same 
fate,  May  30,  1416.  The  three  popes  were  formally  de- 
posed, and  Martin  V.  was  legally  chosen  to  the  chair  of 
St.  Peter;  but  instead  of  furthering  the  Emperor's  wishes 
for  a  reformation  in  the  affairs  of  the  Church,  he 
thwarted  his  plans,  and  nothing  was  accomplished  till 
the  council  of  Basle.  At  this  council  the  question  was 
very  warmly  agitated  whether  the  authority  of  an 
O3cumenical  council  is  greater  than  that  of  the  Pope  or 
not?  Gerson  "proved  (so  it  is  asserted)  that  in  cer- 
tain cases  the  Church,  or,  which  is  the  same  thing,  an 
oecumenical  council,  can  assemble  without  the  command 
or  consent  of  the  Pope,  even  supposing  him  to  have  been 
canonically  elected,  and  to  live  respectably."  These 
peculiar  cases,  he  states  to  be,  "1.  If  the  Pope,  being 
accused,  and  brought  into  a  position  requiring  the  opin- 
ion of  the  Church,  refuses  to  convoke  a  council  for  the 
purpose.  2.  When  important  matters,  concerning  the 
government  of  the  Church,  are  in  agitation,  requiring 
to  be  set  at  rest  by  an  oecumenical  council,  which,  never- 
theless, the  Pope  refuses  to  convoke."  (Herzog,  Heal 
JSncykL,  iii,  144,  and  many  other  authorities.) 

THE    COUNCIL    AT    BASLE. 

This  council  was  called  by  Pope  Martin  V.,  and  con- 
tinued by  Eugenias  IV.  It  was  opened  July  23,  1431, 
by  Cardinal  Julian,  and  closed  May  16,  1443,  forty-live 
sessions  in  all  having  been  held,  of  which  the  first  twenty- 
five  were  acknowledged  by  the  Gallican  Church.  The 
Ultramontanes  reject  it  altogether,  but  "  on  grounds 
utterly  untenable,"  it  is  said.  The  council,  in  its  thirti- 
eth session,  declared  that  "  a  general  council  is  superior 
to  a  pope ; "  and,  in  1437,  Eugenius  transferred  its  ses- 
sions to  Ferrara.  The  council  refused  to  obey,  and  con- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  251 

tinued  its  sessions  at  Basle,  the  capitol  of  a  canton  of 
the  same  name  in  Switzerland.  The  principal  objects 
for  which  this  Council  was  called,  were  the  reformation 
of  the  Church,  and  the  reunion  of  the  Greek  with  the 
Roman  Church.  "Many  of  its  resolutions  were  ad- 
mirable both  in  spirit  and  form;  and  had  the  council 
been  allowed  to  continue  its  sessions,  and  had  the  Pope 
sanctioned  its  proceedings,  there  would  have  ensued  a 
great  and  salutary  change  in  the  Roman  Church."  But 
the  power  of  the  papacy  was  at  stake,  and  the  reform 
was  suppressed.  Its  most  important  acts  were  as  fol- 
lows : 

In  the  first  session,  December  7,  1431,  the  decree  of 
the  council  of  Constance,  concerning  the  celebration  of 
a  general  council  after  five  and  after  seven  years,  was 
read,  together  with  the  bull  of  Martin  V.  convoking  the 
the  council,  in  which  he  named  Julian,  president;  also 
the  letter  of  Eugene  IV.  to  the  latter  upon  the  subject; 
afterward  the  six  objects  proposed  in  calling  the  council 
were  enumerated:  1.  The  extirpation  of  heresy.  2. 
The  reunion  of  all  Christian  persons  with  the  Catholic 
Church.  3.  To  afford  instruction  in  the  true  faith.  4. 
To  appease  the  wars  between  Christian  princes.  5.  To 
reform  the  Church  in  its  head  and  in  its  members.  6. 
To  re-establish,  as  far  as  possible,  the  ancient  discipline 
of  the  Church. 

It  soon  appeared  that  Pope  Eugene  was  determined 
to  break  up  the  council,  which  took  vigorous  measures 
of  defense.  In  the  second  session  (Feb.  15,  1432)  it  was 
"  declared  that  the  synod,  being  assembled  in  the  name 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  representing  the  Church  mili- 
tant, derives  its  power  directly  from  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  and  that  all  persons,  of  whatever  ranker  dignity, 
not  excepting  the  Roman  pontiff  himself,  are  bound  to 


252  HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 

obey  it ;  and  that  any  person,  of  whatever  rank  or  con- 
dition, not  excepting  the  Pope,  who  shall  refuse  to  obey 
the  laws  and  decrees  of  this  or  any  other  general  coun 
cil,  shall  be  put  to  penance  and  punished." 

In  the  third  session  (April  29,  1432)  Pope  Eugene  was 
summoned  to  appear  before  the  council  within  three 
months.  In  August  the  Pope  sent  legates  to  vindicate 
his  authority  over  the  council ;  and  in  the  eighth  session 
(Dec.  18,)  it  was  agreed  that  the  Pope  should  be  pro- 
ceeded against  canonically,  in  order  to  declare  him  con- 
tumacious, and  to  visit  him  with  the  canonical  penalty; 
two  months'  delay,  however,  being  granted  him  within 
which  to  revoke  his  bull  for  the  dissolution  of  the  coun- 
cil. 

On  the  16th  of  January,  1433,  deputies  arrived  from 
the  Bohemians,  demanding  (1)  liberty  to  administer  the 
Eucharist  in  both  kinds;  (2)  that  all  mortal  sin,  and  es- 
pecially open  sin,  should  be  repressed,  corrected,  and 
published,  according  to  God's  law;  (3)  that  the  Word  of 
God  should  be  preached  faithfully  by  the  bishops,  and 
by  such  deacons  as  were  fit  for  it ;  (4)  that  the  clergy 
should  not  possess  authority  in  temporal  matters.  It 
was  afterward  agreed  that  the  clergy  in  Bohemia  and 
Moravia  should  be  allowed  to  give  the  cup  to  the  laity ; 
but  no  reconciliation  was  effected.  In  April,  1433, 
Eugene  signified  his  willingness  to  send  legates  to  the 
council  to  preside  in  his  name,  but  the  council  refused 
his  conditions.  In  the  twelfth  session  (July  14,  1433,) 
the  Pope,  by  a  decree,  was  required  to  renounce  within 
sixty  days  his  design  of  transferring  the  council  from  Basle, 
upon  pain  of  being  pronounced  contumacious.  In  return, 
Eugene,  irritated  by  these  proceedings,  issued  a  bull,  an- 
nulling all  the  decrees  of  the  council  against  himself. 
Later  in  autumn,  the  Pope,  in  fear  of  the  council,  sup- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  253 

ported  as  it  was  by  the  Emperor  and  by  France,  agreed 
to  an  accommodation.  He  chose  four  cardinals  to  pre- 
side with  Julian  at  the  council ;  he  revoked  all  the  bulls 
which  he  had  issued  for  its  dissolution,  and  published 
one  according  to  the  form  sent  him  by  the  council. 
[Session  XIV].  It  was  to  the  effect  that,  although  he 
had  broken  up  the  council  at  Basle  lawfully  assembled, 
nevertheless,  in  order  to  appease  the  disorders  which 
had  arisen,  he  declared  the  council  to  have  been  law- 
fully continued  from  its  commencement,  and  that  it 
would  be  so  to  the  end  ;  that  he  approved  of  all  that  it 
had  offered  and  decided,  and  that  he  declared  the  bull 
for  its  dissolution,  which  he  had  issued,  to  be  null  and 
void;  thus,-as  Bossuet  observes,  setting  the  council  above 
himself,  since,  in  obedience  to  its  order,  he  revoked  his 
own  decree,  made  with  all  the  authority  of  his  pontifical 
see.  In  spite  of  this  forced  yielding,  Eugene  never 
ceased  plotting  for  the  dissolution  of  the  council.  In 
subsequent  sessions  earnest  steps  were  taken  toward  re- 
form; the  annates  and  taxes  (the  Pope's  chief  revenues) 
were  abrogated;  the  papal  authority  over  chapter  elec- 
tions were  restricted ;  citations  to  Rome  on  minor  grounds 
were  forbidden,  etc.  These  movements  increased  the 
hatred  of  the  papal  party,  to  which,  at  last,  Cardinal 
Julian  was  won  over.  The  proposed  reunion  of  the 
Greek  and  Roman  churches  made  it  necessary  to  ap- 
point a  place  of  conference  with  the  Greeks.  The  coun- 
cil proposed  Basle  or  Avignon ;  the  papal  party  de- 
manded an  Italian  city.  The  hitter,  in  the  minority, 
left  Basle,  and  Eugene  called  an  opposition  council  to 
meet  at  Ferrara  in  1437.  After  Julian's  departure  the 
Cardinal  Archbishop  of  Aries  presided. 

In  the  thirty-first  session,  Jan.  24,  1438,   the  council 
declared  the  Pope  Eugene  contumacious,  suspended  him 


254  HISTORY  OF  CIIUKCII  COUNCILS. 

from  the  exercise  of  all  jurisdiction,  temporal  or  spiritual, 
and  pronounced  all  that  ho  should  do  to  be  null  and 
void.  In  the  twenty-fourth  session,  June  25,  1439,  sen- 
tence of  deposition  was  pronounced  against  Eugene, 
making  use  of  the  strongest  possible  terms.  France, 
England  and  Germany  disapproved  of  this  sentence.  On 
October  30,  Amadeus,  Duke  of  Savoy,  was  elected  Pope, 
and  took  the  name  of  Felix  V.  Alphonso,  King  of 
Aragon,  the  Queen  of  Hungary,  and  the  Dukes  of 
Bavaria  and  Austria,  recognized  Felix,  as  also  did  the 
Universities  of  Germany, Paris  and  Cracow;  but  France, 
England  and  Scotland,  while  they  acknowledged  the 
authority  of  the  council  of  Basle,  continued  to  recognize 
Eugene  as  the  lawful  Pope.  Pope  Eugene  dying  four 
years  after,  Nicholas  V.  was  elected  in  his  stead,  and 
recognized  by  tho  whole  Church,  whereupon  Felix  V. 
renounced  the  pontificate  in  1449,  and  thus  the  schism 
ended.  (Mansi,  vols.  29  to  31 ;  London,  Manual  of 
Councils,  74;  Palmer,  On  the  Church;  Moshiem;  Church 
History;  Ranke,  History  of  Papacy,  i,  36,  243. 

COUNCIL    OF    TRENT. 

This  council  is  regarded  by  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church  as  the  last  in  the  order  of  assemblies  known  as 
secumenical  or  general,  and  as  the  great  repository  of 
all  the  doctrinal  judgments  of  that  ecclesiastical  body 
on  the  chief  points  at  issue  with  the  reformers  of  the 
sixteenth  century.  "Very  early  in  this  conflict  with  Leo 
X.,  Luther  had  appealed  from  the  Pope  to  a  general 
council;  and  after  the  failure  of  the  first  attempts  at  an 
adjustment  of  the  controversies,  a  general  desire  grew 
up  in  the  Church  for  the  convocation  of  a  general  coun- 
cil, in  which  the  true  sense  of  the  Church  upon  the  con- 
troversies which  had  been  raised,  might  be  finally  and 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  255 

decretorially  settled.  Another,  and,  to  many,  a  still 
more  pressing  motive  for  desiring  a  council,  was  the 
wish  to  bring  about  a  reform  of  the  alleged  abuses  as 
well  of  the  Court  of  Rome  as  of  the  domestic  discipline 
and  government  of  local  churches,  to  which  the  move- 
ment of  the  reformers  was  in  part  at  least  ascribed.  But 
the  measures  for  convoking  a  council  were  long  delayed, 
owing  partly,  it  has  been  alleged,  to  the  intrigues  of  the 
party  who  were  interested  in  the  maintenance  of  those 
profitable  abuses,  and  especially  of  the  officials  of  the 
Roman  court,  including  the  cardinals,  and  even  the 
popes  themselves;  but  partly  also  the  jealousies,  and 
even  the  actual  conflicts,  which  took  place  between 
Charles  V.  and  the  King  of  France,  whose  joint  action 
was  absolutely  indispensable  to  the  success  of  any  ec- 
clesiastical assembly. "'  (Chamber's  Encyclopaedia,  vol. 
ix.,p.  533.) 

It  was  not  till  the  pontificate  of  Paul  III.  (1534-1549) 
that  the  design  assumed  a  practical  character.  One  of 
the  great  difficulties  was  that  in  regard  to  a  place  of 
meeting.  In  these  discussions  much  time  was  lost;  and 
without  entering  into  detail,  it  is  sufficient  to  say  that 
the  assembly  did  not  actually  meet  till  December  13, 
1545,  at  which  time  four  archbishops,  twenty-two  bishops, 
five  generals  of  orders,  and  the  representatives  of  the 
Emperor  and  of  the  King  of  the  Romans,  assembled  at 
Trent,  a  city  of  the  Tyrol.  The  number  of  prelates  after- 
wards increased.  The  Pope  was  represented  by  three 
legates,  who  presided  in  his  name,  viz.,  Cardinals  del 
Monte,  Cervino  and  Pole.  The  first  three  sessions  were 
devoted  to  preliminaries.  It  was  not  till  the  fourth  ses- 
sion (April,  1546)  that  the  really  important  work  of  the 
council  began.  It  was  decided,  after  much  disputation, 
that  the  doctrinal  questions  and  the  questions  of  reforma- 
tion should  both  be  proceeded  with  simultaneously.  Ac- 


256  HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 

cordingly,  the  discussions  on  both  subjects  were  continued 
through  the  fourth,  fifth,  sixth  and  seventh  sessions,  in 
all  of  which  "matters  of  great  moment  were  decided;  " 
when  a  division  between  the  Pope  and  the  Emperor, 
who,  by  the  victory  of  Miihlberg,  had  become  all-power- 
ful in  the  empire,  made  the  former  desirous  to  transfer 
the  council  some  place  beyond  the  reach  of  Charles' 
arbitrary  dictation.  The  appearance  of  the  plague  at 
Trent  furnished  a  cause  for  removal,  and  in  the  eighth 
session  a  decree  was  passed  (March  11, 1547)  transferring 
the  council  to  Bologna. 

The  change  of  place  was  opposed  by  the  bishops 
who  were  in  the  imperial  interest,  and  the  division 
which  ensued  had  the  effect  of  suspending  all  practical 
action.  In  the  meantime,  Paul  III.  died.  Julius  III., 
who  had,  as  Cardinal  del  Monte,  presided  as  legate  in 
the  council,  took  measures  for  its  resumption  at  Trent, 
where  it  again  assembled,  May  1,  1551.  The  sessions 
9-12,  held  partly  at  Bologna,  and  partly  at  Trent,  were 
spent  in  discussions  regarding  the  suspension  and  re- 
moval ;  but  in  the  thirteenth  session  the  real  work  of 
the  assembly  was  renewed,  and  was  continued,  slowly, 
but  with  great  care,  till  the  sixteenth  session,  when,  on 
account  of  the  apprehended  insecurity  of  Trent,  the 
passes  of  the  Tyrol  having  fallen  into  the  hands  of 
Maurice,  of  Saxony,  the  sittings  were  again  suspended 
for  two  years. 

But  the  suspension  was  destined  to  continue  for  no 
less  than  nine  years.  Julius  III.  died  in  1555,  and  was 
followed  rapidly  to  the  grave  by  his  successor  (who  had 
also  been  his  fellow-legate  in  the  council  as  Cardinal 
Cervina)  Marcellus  II.  The  pontificate  of  Paul  IV. 
(1555-1559)  wars  a  very  troubled  one,  as  well  on  account 
of  internal  dissensions  as  owing  to  the  abdication  of 
Charles  V.;  nor  was  it  till  the  accession  of  Pius  IV. 


REFORMATORY   MOVEMENTS.  257 

(1559-1565)  that  the  bishops  and  legates  were  again 
brought  together  to  the  number  of  102,  under  the  presi- 
dency of  Cardinal  Gonzaga,  reopening  their  deliberations 
with  the  seventeenth  session.  All  the  succeeding  ses- 
sions were  "devoted  to  matters  of  the  highest  import- 
ance," among  which  may  be  mentioned  such  doctrines 
and  practices  as  (1)  communion  under. one  kind,  (2)  the 
sacrifice  of  the  mass,  (3)  the  sacrament  of  orders,  (4)  the 
nature  and  origin  of  the  grades  of  the  hierarchy,  (5) 
marriage  and  the  many  questions  relating  to  it.  These 
grave  discussions  occupied  the  sessions  17-24,  and  lasted 
till  November  11,  1563.  •  Much  anxiety  was  expressed 
on  the  part  of  many  bishops  to  draw  the  council  to  a 
conclusion,  in  order  that  they  might  be  able  to  return 
to  their  sees  in  a  time  so  critical;  and  accordingly,  as 
the  preliminary  discussions  regarding  most  of  the  re- 
maining questions  had  already  taken  place,  decrees 
were  prepared  in  special  congregations  comprising  al- 
most all  the  remaining  subjects  of  controversy,  as  (1) 
purgatory,  (2)  invocation  of  saints,  (3)  images,  (4)  relics, 
and  (5)  indulgences.  Several  other  matters,  rather  of 
detail  than  of  doctrinal  principle,  were  referred  to  the 
Pope,  to  be  by  him  examined  and  arranged ;  and  on  the 
3d  and  4th  of  December,  1563,  these  important  decrees 
were  finally  read,  approved  and  subscribed  by  the  mem- 
bers of  the  assembly,  consisting  of  four  cardinal  legates, 
two  other  cardinals,  twenty-five  archbishops,  168  bishops, 
seven  abbots,  seven  generals  of  orders  and  thirty-nine 
proxies  of  bishops,  comprising  in  all  252. 

These  decrees  were  confirmed  January  10,  1564,  by 
by  Pius  IV.,  who  had  drawn  up,  based  upon  them  in 
conjunction  with  the  creeds  previously  in  use,  a  profes 
sion  of  faith  known  under  his  name.  "  The  doctrinal 
decrees  of  the  council  were  received  at  once  throughout 
the  Western  C'hurch,  a  fact  which  it  is  necessary  to 


258  HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 

note,  as  the  question  as  to  the  reception  of  the  decrees 
of  doctrine  has  sometimes  beeu  confounded  with  that  re- 
garding the  decrees  of  reformation  or  discipline."  As 
to  the  latter,  delays  and  reservations  took  place.  The  first 
country  to  receive  the  decrees  of  the  council  as  a  whole, 
was  the  Republic  of  Venice.  France  accepted  the  dis- 
ciplinary decrees  only  piece  meal  and  at  intervals. 

The  canons  and  decrees  of  the  council  of  Trent  were 
issued  in  Latin,  and  have  been  reprinted  innumerable 
times.  They  have  also  been  translated  into  almost 
every  modern  language.  One  of  the  supplementary 
works  assigned  to  the  Pope  by  the  council  at  its  break- 
ing up,  was  the  completion  of  a  catechism  for  the  use  of 
parish  priests  and  preachers.  This  work  has  not  all 
the  authority  of  the  council,  but  it  is  of  the  very  highest 
credit,  and  is  extensively  used,  having,  like  the  canons 
and  decrees,  been  very  generally  translated.  Another 
similar  work  was  the  publication  of  an  authentic  edition 
of  the  Vulgate  version  of  the  Bible,  as  well  as  of  the 
Breviary  and  Missal.  All  these  have  been  accomplished 
at  intervals;  and  there  is  besides  at  Home  a  permanent 
tribunal,  a  congregation  of  cardinals,  styled  " Congregatio 
Interpres  Concilii  Tridentini,"  to  which  belongs  the  duty 
of  dealing  with  all  questions  which  arise  as  to  the 
meaning,  the  authority,  or  the  effect  of  the  canons  and 
decrees  of  this  celebrated  council.  (Chamber's  Ency- 
clopedia, vol.  ix. ,  p.  534.) 

It  would  occupy  entirely  too  much  space  to  give  the 
dry  and  uninteresting  details  of  this  council.  But  we 
have  given  a  faithful  outline  of  its  proceedings.  Suffice 
to  say  that  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  of  the  present 
day  is  but  a  counterpart,  theologically  and  morally,  of 
the  council  of  Trent.  During  the  various  sittings  of 
the  sessions,  such  questions  as  these  were  discussed:  the 
personal  sin  of  Adam  ;  original  sin ;  the  immaculate  con- 


REFORMATORY   MOVEMENTS.  259 

ception  of  the  Virgin  Mary  ;  non-resident  bishops ;  justi- 
fication as  opposed  to  Luther  and  other  reformers;  in- 
fant baptism;  the  validity  of  baptism;  the  conferring  of 
grace  by  the  sacraments ;  transubstantiation  as  opposed 
to  consubstantiation;  extreme  unction;  priestly  vest- 
ments ;  a  visible  priesthood ;  whether  the  cup  should  be 
given  to  the  laity  at  the  communion  ;  pictures  and 
images ;  a  general  overhauling  of  the  theology  of  Luther 
and  Zwingle  and  Melancthon. 

The  importance  of  the  so-called  oecumenical  councils 
has  often  been  greatly  over-estimated,  not  only  by  the 
Greeks  and  Roman  Catholics,  but  also  by  many  Protest- 
ants. John  Jortin,  D.D.,  an  eminent  preacher  of  the 
eighteenth  century,  and  of  the  Church  of  England,  tells 
us  very  forcibly  that  councils  "  were  a  collection  of 
men  who  were  frail  and  fallible.  Some  of  these  councils 
were  not  assemblies  of  pious  and  learned  divines,  but 
cabals,  the  majority  of  which  were  quarrelsome,  fanati- 
cal, domineering,  dishonest  prelates,  who  wanted  to  com- 
pel men  to  approve  all  their  opinions,  of  which  they 
themselves  had  no  clear  conceptions,  and  to  anathema- 
tize and  oppose  those  who  would  not  implicitly  sub- 
mit to  their  determinations. "  (  Works,  vol.  iii. ,  charge  2). 

The  Romanists  hold  that  the  Pope  alone  can  convene 
and  conduct  secumenical  councils,  which  are  supposed, 
on  their  theory,  to  represent  the  universal  Church  under 
the  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  In  matters  of  faith, 
councils  profess  to  be  guided  by  the  Holy  Scriptures  and 
the  traditions  of  the  Church,  while  in  lighter  matters 
human  reason  and  expediency  are  consulted.  In  matters 
of  faith,  eecumenical  councils  are  hold  to  be  infallible, 
and  hence  it  is  maintained  that  all  such  synods  have 
agreed  together;  but  in  matters  of  discipline,  etc.,  the 
authority  of  the  latest  council  prevails.  The  Roman 
claim  is  not  sanctioned  by  history.  The  emperors  called 


260  HISTORY  OF  CHURCH  COUNCILS. 

the  first  seven  councils,  and  either  presided  over  them 
in  person  or  by  commissioners ;  and  the  final  ratification 
of  the  decisions  was  also  left  to  the  Emperor.  But  the 
Greek  Church  agrees  with  the  Latin  in  ascribing  ab- 
solute authority  to  the  decisions  of  truly  secumenical 
councils.  Gregory  of  Xazianzus  (who  was  president 
for  a  time  of  the  second  oecumenical  council)  speaks 
strongly  of  the  evils  to  which  such  assemblies  are  liable. 
He  says:  "lam  inclined  to  avoid  conventions  of  bishops ; 
I  never  knew  one  that  did  not  come  to  a  bad  end,  and  cre- 
ate more  disorders  than  it  attempted  to  rectify. "  A  remarka- 
ble view  of  the  authority  of  councils  was  that  of  Nico- 
las of  Clamengis,  viz.,  that  they,  in  his  opinion,  could 
claim  regard  for  their  resolutions  only  if  the  members 
were  really  believers,  and  if  they  were  more  concerned 
for  the  salvation  of  souls  than  for  secular  interests.  His 
views  on  general  councils  were  fully  set  forth  in  a 
little  work  entitled  :  Disputatio  de  concilia  generali,  which 
consists  of  three  letters,  addressed  in  1415  or  1416,  to  a 
professor  at  the  Paris  University  (printed  apparently  at 
Vienna  in  1482).  He  not  only  places  the  authority  of 
general  councils  over  the  authority  of  the  popes,  but  the 
authority  of  the  Bible  over  the  authority  of  the  councils. 
He  doubts  whether  at  all  the  former  aBcumenical  councils 
the  Holy  Spirit  really  presided,  as  the  Holj*  Spirit 
would  not  assist  men  pursuing  secular  aims.  He  denieg 
that  a  council  composed  of  such  men  represents  the 
Church,  and  asserts  that  God  alone  knows  who  are  his 
people,  and  where  the  Holy  Spirit  dwells,  and  that  there 
may  be  times  when  the  Church  can  only  be  found  in 
one  single  woman.  After  the  lapse  of  over  300  years, 
the  Pope  in  1867  signified  his  purpose  to  summon  an- 
other secumenical  (or  universal)  council ;  but  of  course 
none  but  Roman  bishops  attended  it.  (McCliutock  and 
Strong's  Encyclopaedia,  vol.  ii,  p.  539.) 


GOSPEL  PRINCIPLES. 


FAITH   AND    SIGHT. 

IN  this  age  of  unbelief  and  gross  skepticism,  where 
every  possible  attempt  is  made  to  undermine  the  very 
foundation  of  Christianity,  and,  if  possible,  to  dethrone 
Jesus  Christ,  and  rob  him  of  his  glory  and  his  divinity, 
and  where  scoffers  take  pleasure  in  reducing  the  word 
of  God  to  a  level  with  the  words  of  uninspired  men,  it 
devolves  upon  the  defenders  of  the  faith  to  review  and 
reconsider  the  ground  of  their  hope,  and  to  re-establish 
in  the  hearts  of  believers  their  confidence  in  a  divine 
revelation.  Christians  walk  by  faith,  not  by  sight. 
Their  faith  in  a  divine  revelation  is  founded  upon  testi- 
mony. They  depend  upon  the  common  rules  of  evi- 
dence. They  apply  the  same  rules  of  interpretation  to 
a  divine  revelation  that  they  apply  to  a  human  compo- 
sition. Where  there  is  no  testimony  there  is  no  faith— 
upon  any  subject.  Faith  is  made  strong  or  weak  accord- 
ing to  the  degree  of  testimony.  In  the  absence  of  testi- 
mony there  can  be  no  faith.  Every  proposition  must  be 
established  by  its  own  kind  of  testimony.  That  is  to 
say,  a  historical  proposition  must  be  proved  by  historical 
testimony;  a  proposition  in  mathematics  must  be  dem- 
onstrated by  mathematical  principles;  the  science  of 
geology  (if  there  is  such  a  science)  must  be  established 
by  the  proofs  of  geology;  a  proposition  in  chemistry 

(261) 


2G2  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

• 

must  be  sustained  by  the  laws  of  physics;  a  supernatural 
proposition  can  only  be  sustained  by  supernatural  testi- 
mony, and  can  not  be  sustained  by  the  laws  of  nature. 
The  proof  of  spiritual  things  must  be  found,  and  can 
only  be  found,  within  the  sphere  of  spiritual  things,  as 
the  proof  of  mathematics,  can  only  be  found  within 
the  realm  of  that  science.  These  are  all  self-evident 
propositions,  which  no  reasonable  man  will  deny. 

Men  testify  to  what  they  see  and  hear.  But  their 
own  senses  may  deceive  them,  if  there  is  not  corrobora- 
tive and  cumulative  evidence.  Circumstantial  evidence 
is  stronger  than  the  evidence  of  the  natural  senses,  and 
is  so  held  in  all  courts  of  law  and  judicature.  The 
qualities  of  a  reliable  witness  are,  (1)  good  eye-sight, 
(2)  good  hearing,  (3)  an  honest  heart.  These  were  the 
qualities  of  the  witnesses  chosen  by  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 
Living  in  the  open  air  continually,  as  was  the  case  of 
the  witnesses  chosen  by  Christ,  their  hearing  would 
naturally  become  very  acute,  and  their  vision  would 
become  very  sensitive  to  all  external  objects.  Christ 
did  not  go  among  princes  to  select  his  witnesses,  nor 
choose  from  among  the  wealthy  and  the  educated  class- 
es, nor  draw  from  the  schools  of  philosophers  and  rhet- 
oricians, but  he  chose  honest-hearted  men,  who,  divested 
of  the  fetters  and  cares  of  a  commercial  and  trading 
life,  and  of  the  conventionalities  of  the  polite  world, 
enjoyed  the  full  possession  of  all  their  natural  powers. 
The  apostles  were  the  witnesses  of  Jesus  the  Christ, 
and  they  testified  before  the  court  of  the  world  as  to 
what  they  saw  and  heard  in  the  life  of  Christ,  and  their 
accumulated  evidence  challenges  the  world.  If  the  test- 
imony— the  accumulated  testimony — of  the  apostles  can 
not  be  relied  upon,  then  no  testimony  in  the  world  can 
be  relied  on,  and  all  the  testimony  of  the  past  ages,  in 


REFORMATORY   MOVEMENTS.  263 

all  the  domains  of  fact,  is  nothing  but  a  shapeless  heap 
of  chaos. 

It  is  not  our  purpose  in  this  series  of  essays  to  inves- 
tigate the  supernatural  claims  of  Christianity,  nor  to 
undertake  to  prove  that  which,  in  a  thousand  ways  and 
a  thousand  times,  has  been  placed  beyond  doubt.  We 
simply  appeal  to  common-sense  principles.  We  meet 
the  infidel  upon  his  own  ground  and  ask  no  favors  of 
him.  The  infidel  believes  there  were  such  persons  as 
Washington,  Lafayette,  Napoleon  Bonaparte,  Byron, 
JBacon,  Plato,  Aristotle,  Csesar,  Cicero,  Demosthenes, 
Alexander  the  Great,  Pliny,  Plutarch,  Herodotus,  et  al. 
How  does  he  know  there  were  such  persons  in  existence 
at  the  times  indicated  by  history?  We  answer  by  say- 
ing that  by  the  same  rules  of  evidence  with  which  he 
proves  the  personalities  of  those  historical  characters, 
we  prove,  the  personality  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth.  If  once 
we  prove  the  personality  of  Christ,  it  is  easy  to  prove 
his  supernatural  origin,  and  hence  his  divinity;  and  this 
we  propose  to  do  by  concessions  which  infidels  them- 
selves unwillingly  make.  Men  who  stand  highest  in  the 
ranks  of  infidelity,  concede  that  Jesus  was  absolutely 
a  pure  and  good  man,  and  absolutely  a  perfect  man, 
without  the  least  taint  of  sin,  and  without  the  least 
semblance  of  imperfection.  A  man  absolutely  good  and 
absolutely  perfect  can  not  lie.  This  man,  who  is  con- 
ceded to  be  absolutely  perfect  as  a  man,  said:  "I  am  the 
Son  of  God;"  "I  came  down  from  heaven  to  seek  and 
to  save  the  lost;"  "lam  the  Savior  of  men;"  ';I  and 
my  Father  are  one;"  "I  was  in  the  bosom  of  my  Father 
before  the  worlds  began  to  be;"  "I  am  the  way,  the 
truth  and  the  life;"  "Before  Abraham  was  I  am;"  "I 
am  the  resurrection  and  the  life;"  "Xo  man  can  come 
to  me,  except  the  Father  who  sent  me  draw  him,  and  / 


264  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

will  raise  him  up  at  the  last  day."  What  we  want  to 
know  is  this:  Did  Christ  utter  a  falsehood  when  he  ut- 
tered these  sentiments?  Not  if  he  was,  as  conceded  by 
the  infidel,  absolutely  good  and  absolutely  pure  and  per- 
fect. As  i£  was  morally  impossible  for  him  to  utter  a 
falsehood,  it  is  morally  certain  that  he  was  Immanuel — 
God  manifested  in  flesh. 

We  now  propose  to  consider  the  following  questions, 
as  they  relate  to  the  subject  of  faith:  (1)  What  is  the 
definition  of  faith?  (2)  What  is  the  foundation  of  faith? 
(3)  How  many  kinds  of  faith  are  there?  (4)  How  does 
faith  come?  (5)  The  objects  of  faith?  (6)  Illustrations 
of  faith? 

I.  Paul  defines  faith  as  "the  evidence  of  things  hoped 
for,  the  conviction  of  things  not  seen,"  (Heb.  xi.  1, 
Macknight's  translation.)  The  best  human  definition 
of  faith  we  ever  heard  of  came  from  the  lips  of  an  Irish 
woman.  When  interrogated  by  her  bishop  as  to  the 
meaning  of  faith,  she  answered,  after  some  hesitation, 
"Sir,  faith  means  taking  God  at  his  word'''  Very  sim- 
ple, and  yet  how  comprehensive.  If  all  people  were  to 
"take  God  at  his  word,"  what  a  happy  world  this  would 
be.  If  all  men  and  all  priests  and  pastors  would  put 
out  of  sight  all  theories  and  all  speculations,  and  all 
dreams  and  figments  of  the  fancy,  and  all  psychological 
sensations,  and  all  mysterious  and  mystical  impressions, 
and  simply  "take  God  at  his  word,"  not  only,  as  an 
effect,  would  God's  children  come  to  see  eye  to  eye  and 
stand  upon  the  same  basis  of  Christian  union,  but  infi- 
delity itself  would  be  shorn  of  its  greatest  strength  of 
opposition,  and  quail  before  the  majesty  of  God's  eter- 
nal truth. 

We  must  distinguish  between  faith  as  an  act  of  the 
mind,  as  influenced  by  testimony,  and  "the  faith"  as 


REFORMATORY     MOVEMENTS.  265 

representing  the  system  of  salvation.  To  "contend 
earnestly  for  the  faith,"  is  to  contend  for  that  system 
of  things  which  contains  all  the  elements  of  the  gospel. 
The  apostles  use  the  terms  "the  faith"  and  "the  law 
of  faith"  interchangeably  with  "the  doctrine"  or  the 
teaching.  The  apostles  place  "the  faith"  of  the  gospel 
'in  contrast  with  the  "law  of  Moses." 

II.  The  foundation  of  faith  is  found  in  the  divine 
testimonies.  Facts  produce  testimony.  A  fact  is  some- 
thing done.  An  opinion  is  not  something  done.  An 
opinion  is  what  a  man  thinks,  and  his  opinion  may  be 
right  or  it  may  be  wrong.  Opinions  differ,  but  facts 
never.  And  yet  many  systems  of  religion,  formulated 
in  creeds,  are  but  the  systematized  opinions  of  men, 
and,  therefore,  human,  fallible  and  misleading,  and  also 
very  sinful.  Present  knowledge  does  not  produce  faith. 
Whatever  we  are  conscious  of,  by  the  sensation  of  hoar- 
ing,  seeing  and  tasting,  does  not  constitute  faith.  We 
must  always,  to  reason  correctly  and  deduce  logical  con- 
clusions, distinguish  between  conscious  knowledge,  opin- 
ion and  fact.  The  knowledge  of  sensation  never  enters 
the  domain  of  faith,  and  yet  many  religious  teachers 
substitute  sensations  for  facts,  and  make  sensations  the 
evidence  of  pardon,  instead  of  God's  word  or  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  which  are  revealed  to  us  as  facts.  Paul  tells 
us  distinctly,  in  his  grand  culminating  argument,  as 
recorded  in  Hebrews  xi.,  that  "  without  faith  it  is  impos- 
sible to  please  God,"  and  that  "they  who  come  to  God 
must  believe  that  he  is,  arid  that  he  is  the  rewarder  of 
them  who  diligently  seek  him."  Under  the  Jewish  law, 
and  in  the  days  of  the  prophet  Jeremiah,  there  were 
false  prophets  who  presumed  to  substitute  dreams,  and 
psychological  sensations,  and  vain  imaginations,  for  the 
statutes  of  the  Almighty.  Jeremiah,  compares  these 


GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

animal  sensations  and  God's  word,  and,  while  he  repre- 
sents sensations  as  "chaff',"  he,  at  the  same  time,  repre- 
sents the  word  of  God  as  "wheat."  Please  read  the 
entire  twenty-third  chapter.  The  prophet  of  God  says: 
"To  the  law  and  to  the  testimony;  if  any  speak  not 
according  to  this  word,  it  is  because  there  is  no  light  in 
him." 

The  accumulative  testimonies  of  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke 
and  John,  concerning  the  Messiahship  of  Christ,  and  as 
regards  his  life  and  miracles,  and,  also,  as  touching  upon 
the  doctrine  of  immortality,  which  he  enunciated,  stand 
before  the  world  as  irrefutable  facts.  Says  the  apostle 
John,  "And  many  other  signs  [miracles]  truly  did  Jesus 
in  the  presence  of  his  disciples,  which  are  not  written 
in  this  book.  But  these  are  written,  that  you  might 
believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God;  and 
that  believing,  you  might  have  life  through  his  name." 
(John  xx.  30,  31.)  Luke  opens  his  narrative  as  follows: 
"Forasmuch  as  many  have  taken  in  hand  to  set  forth 
in  order  a  declaration  of  those  things  which  are  most 
surely  believed  among  us,  even  as  they  delivered  them  to 
us,  who,  from  the  beginning,  were  eye-witnesses  and  min- 
isters of  the  word:  it  seemed  good  to  me  also,  Laving 
had  perfect  understanding  of  all  things  from  the  very  first, 
to  write  to  thee  in  order,  most  excellent  Theophilus,  that 
thou  mightest  know  the  certainty  of  those  things  wherein 
thou  hast  been  instructed."  In  the  preface  of  his  sec- 
ond treatise — Acts  of  the  Apostles — Luke  thus  writes: 
"The  former  treatise  [the  Gospel  of  Luke]  have  I  made, 
O  Theophilus,  of  all  that  Jesus  began  both  to  do  and 
teach,  until  the  day  in  which  he  was  taken  up,  after  that 
he  through  the  Holy  Spirit  had  given  commandments 
to  the  apostles  whom  he  had  chosen:  to  whom,  also,  he 
showed  himself  alive  after  his  passion  [his  sufferings 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  267 

and  death],  by  many  infallible  proofs,  being  seen  of  them 
forty  days,  and  speaking  of  the  things  pertaining  to  the 
kingdom  of  God:  and,  being  assembled  together  with 
them,  commanded  them  that  they  should  not  depart  from 
Jerusalem,  but  wait  for  the  promise  of  the  Father,  which, 
saith  he,  you  have  heard  of  me. " 

These  treatises,  with  the  corroborative  testimonies  of 
contemporaneous  historians,  furnish  the  facts  of  the 
foundation  of  our  faith  ;  to  which  also  may  be  added 
the  invaluable  testimony  of  Paul  as  recorded  in  the  fif- 
teenth chapter  of  First  Corinthians,  the  honest  investi- 
gation of  which  has  converted  many  an  infidel. 

Having  in  a  previous  number  established  the  founda- 
tion of  Christian  faith,  we  next  propose  to  ascertain  how 
many  kinds  of  faith  there  are  to  be  found  in  the  Bible. 
On  examination,  we  discover  that  there  is  only  one  kind 
of  faith,  for  we  are  so  informed  by  the  apostle  Paul, 
who  tells  us  in  Eph.  iv.  5  that  there  is  "one  Lord,  one 
faith  and  one  baptism. " 

III.  God  has  endowed  every  rational  man  with  intel- 
lectual power  with  which  to  examine  testimony.  The 
same  faculties  of  the  mind  with  which  he  investigates 
one  proposition  he  investigates  every  proposition,  wheth- 
er human  or  divine.  There  is  not  one  set  of  mental 
faculties  fitted,  in  a  peculiar  manner,  for  the  investiga- 
tion of  one  proposition,  and  another  set  furnished  for 
the  examination  of  a  different  proposition,  or  a  new  set 
furnished  as  often  as  the  character  of  the  subject  changes. 
"We  use  the  same  faculties  in  examining  the  testimonies 
concerning  Jesus  Christ  as  the  Son  of  God,  and  in  in- 
vestigating his  claims  upon  the  world,  that  we  use  in 
trying  to  discover  whether  such  a  man  as  Moses,  or 
Cyrus,  or  Pompey,  or  Cato,  or  Aurelius,  had  a  real  ex- 
istence. The  same  rules  of  evidence  and  of  interpretation 


268  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

are  applied  ir»  the  exploration  of  all  kinds  of  truth,  just 
as  the  same  eyes  are  used  in  viewing  all  objects,  and  just 
as  the  same  ears  are  used  in  hearing  all  sounds,  whether 
soft  or  harsh,  whether  harmonious  or  inharmonious. 
It  does  not  follow  that  because  we  see  different  objects 
we  have  different  sets  of  eyes,  or  that  because  we  hear 
varied  sounds  we  have  various  sets  of  ears,  or  that  we 
have  as  many  palates  as  the  objects  we  taste.  Dr.  Buck's 
"Theological  Dictionary"  contains  different  kinds  of 
faith,  such  as  "saving  faith,"  "evangelical  faith,"  "his- 
torical faith,"  "direct  faith,"  "reflex  faith,"  "dead  faith,'' 
"living  faith,"  the  "faith  of  works,"  the  "faith  of  devils," 
the  "faith  of  miracles,"  etc.  No  such  incongruities  are 
found  in  the  Bible.  These  are  all  fanciful  and  specula- 
tive distinctions,  conjured  up  in  the  minds  of  mystics 
and  ascetics,  who,  having  retired  from  the  world  and 
having  entered  their  closets  and  their  cloisters,  lost  their 
wits  and  became  fools.  Says  Pollock  : 

"Faith  was  bewildered  much  by  men  who  meant 
To  make  it  clear,  so  simple  in  itself, 
A  thought  so  rudimental  and  so  plain, 
That  none  by  comment  could  it  plainer  make. 
All  faith  was  one.     In  object,  not  in  kind, 
The  difference  lay.     The  faith  that  saved  a  soul, 
And  that  which  in  the  common  truth  believed, 
In  essence  were  the  same.     Hear  then,  what  faith, 
True  Christian  faith,  which  brought  salvation,  was  : 
Belief  in  all  that  God  revealed  to  men  : 
Observe  in  all  that  God  revealed  to  men, 
In  all  he  promised,  threatened,  commanded,  said, 
Without  exception  and  without  a  doubt." 

IV.  How  does  faith  come?  Paul  informs  us  that 
"faith  comes  by  hearing  the  word  of  God."  (Rom.  x.  17.) 
Some  hold,  and  especially  the  mystics  of  many  of  the 
orthodox  churches,  that  faith  is  the  direct  gift  of  God, 


REFORMATORY    PRINCIPLES.  209 

and  that  no  one  can  believe  until  he  receives  this  gift. 
John  Wesley  says  that  faith,  or  the  power  to  believe, 
is  the  gift  of  God,  just  as  seeing  is  the  gift  of  God,  or 
hearing  the  gift  of  God;  but  if  we  close  our  eyes,  which 
are  the  gift  of  God,  we  can  not  see;  or  if  we  stop  our 
ears,  which  are  also  the  gift  of  God,  we  can  not  hear. 
In  like  manner,  though  the  power  to  believe  be  the  gift 
of  God,  if  we  close  the  eyes  of  onr  understanding  we 
can  not  perceive  the  truth.  The  power  to  believe  is  one 
thing,  to  exercise  that  power  is  quite  another  thing.  Just 
see  how  our  Savioi  in  his  address  to  the  multitude  ex- 
plains the  method  of  perceiving  and  understanding  the 
truth.  He  says : 

"And  in  them  is  fulfilled  the  prophecy  of  Esaias, 
which  says:  By  hearing  you  shall  hear,  and  shall  not 
understand;  and  seeing  you  shall  see,  and  shall  not  per- 
ceive ;  for  this  people's  heart  is  waxed  gross,  and  their  cars 
are  dull  of  hearing,  and  their  eyes  they  have  closed;  lest 
at  any  time  they  should  see  with  their  eyes,  and  hear  with 
their  ears,  and  should  understand  with  the  heart,  and  should 
turn  [new  version]  and  I  should  heal  them.  But  blessed 
are  your  eyes,  for  they  see;  and  your  ears,  for  they  hear. 
For  truly  I  say  unto  you,  that  many  prophets  and  right, 
eous  men  have  desired  to  see  those  things  which  you  see- 
and  have  not  seen  them;  and  to  hear  those  things  which 
you  hear,  and  have  not  heard  them."  (Matt.  xiii.  14-17. ) 

"Faith  comes  by  hearing  the  word.,  of  God,"  and  does 
not  descend  from  heaven  on  a  sunbeam  or  on  a  moon- 
beam; does  not  drop  down  from  heaven  in  a  napkin; 
does  not  flash  from  the  golden  tip  of  an  angel's  wing; 
does  not  appear  upon  the  face  of  a  cloud  in  the  form 
of  a  cross;  does  not  whisper  salvation  in  a  passing  breeze; 
is  not  imparted  to  the  soul  of  a  sinner  by  a  spark  of 
electricity;  is  not  conveyed  upon  the  white  wings  of  a 


270  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

descending  evangel  of  the  skies;  does  not  come  upon 
stealthy  wing  from  some  dark  cavern  or  whip  out  of 
some  dense  jungle.  "But  the  righteousness  which  is 
of  faith  speaks  on  this  wise :  Say  not  in  thine  heart, 
Who  shall  ascend  into  heaven  (that  is,  to  bring  Christ 
down  from  above)?  or  who  shall  descend  into  the  deep 
(that  is,  to  bring  up  Christ  again  from  the  dead)?  But 
what  says  it?  The  word  is  nigh  thee,  even  in  thy  mouth 
and  in  thy  heart;  that  is,  the  word  of  faith,  which  we 
preach.  That  if  thou  shalt  confess  with  thy  mouth  the 
Lord  Jesus,  and  shalt  believe  in  thy  heart  that  God  hath 
raised  him  from  the  dead,  thou  shalt  be  saved.  For 
with  the  heart  man  believes  unto  righteousness;  and  with 
the  mouth  confession  is  made  unto  salvation."  (Rom. 
x.  6-10.) 

Salvation  is  the  gift  of  God,  and  this  blessing  is  re- 
ceived through  the  medium  of  faith.  See  Eph.  ii.  8. 
Facts  produce  testimony,  testimony  produces  conviction 
— "convicts  of  sin,  of  righteousness,  and  of  judgment 
to  come;"  conviction  leads  to  repentance;  repentance 
results  in  "the  obedience  of  the  faith,"  which  is  immer- 
sion into  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and 
of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Faith  is  the  medium  of  salvation 
from  sin,  just  as  eating  and  drinking  are  a  medium 
through  which  physical  life  is  sustained.  It  is  not  the 
manner  of  eating  and  drinking  that  sustains  animal  life, 
but  it  is  the  thing  eaten.  There  is  no  virtue  in  faith  as 
an  act  of  the  mind  to  save  the  soul,  but  it  is  the  thing 
appropriated  by  faith  or  through  faith  that  saves  the 
soul.  It  is  the  thing  believed  that  saves,  and  not  the 
manner  of  believing. 

V.  What  is  the  great  object  of  Christian  faith?  On 
what  object  must  faith  terminate?  Salvation  is  not  in 
a  thing,  but  in  a  person.  The  object  of  faith  is  not  a 


•  REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  271 

creed,  not  a  confession  of  faith,  not  a  set  of  dogmas,  not 
a  "  church  standard,"  not  a  platforfn  of  principles,  not  a 
church,  not  the  law  of  Moses,  not  the  "Institutes"  of 
Calvin,  or  the  institutes  of  any  other  man;  but  Jesus 
Christ  the  Savior  of  the  world.  Salvation  is  in  the 
person  of  Christ.  "All  the  promises  of  God  are  in  him 
yea,  and  in  him  Amen."  The  apostles  preached  "Christ 
and  him  crucified."  They  preached  Christ  as  the  "wis- 
dom of  God  and  the  power  of  God."  "But  of  him  are 
you  in  Christ  Jesus,  who  of  God  is  made  unto  us  wisdom, 
and  righteousness,  and  sanctification,  and  redemption." 
(1  Cor.  i.  30.)  On  the  day  of  Pentecost  Peter  present- 
ed the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  as  the  great  object  of  faith. 
"  This  is  the  stone  which  was  set  at  naught  of  you  build- 
ers,.which  is  become  the  head  of  the  corner.  Neither 
is  there  salvation  in  any  other;  for  there  is  none  other 
name  under  heaven  given  among  men  whereby  we  must 
be  saved."  (Acts  iv.  11,  12.)  "Him  hath  God  exalted 
with  his  right  hand  to  be  a  prince  and  a  Savior,  for  to 
give  repentance  to  Israel  and  forgiveness  of  sins."  (Acts 
v.  31.)  "To  him  gave  all  the  prophets  witness,  that 
through  his  name  whosoever  believes  in  him  shall  re- 
ceive remission  of  sins."  (Acts  x.  43.)  When  Philip 
preached  to  the  Ethiopian  eunuch  he  "began  at  the 
same  Scripture,  and  preached  to  him  Jesus."  The  apos- 
tles never  preached  the  Hoty  Spirit  as  the  object  of  faith, 
but,  being  endowed  with  the  Holy  Spirit,  they  always 
presented  the  risen  and  glorified  Christ  as  the  supreme 
object  of  faith.  They  presented  him  as  Prophet,  Priest 
and  King.  They  presented  him  in  his  death,  burial  and 
resurrection.  They  presented  him  in  all  his  command- 
ments and  ordinances.  To  "believe  on  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ"  is  the  same  as  to  "obey  the  gospel  of  our  Lord 
and  Savior  Jesus  Christ. "  Christ  says.  "  He  that  hath 
22  ^  ' 


272  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

the  Son  hath  eternal  life,  and  he  that  obeyeth  [new  ver- 
sion] not  the  Son  hath  not  eternal  life,  hut  the  wrath 
of  God  ahideth  upon  him."  Ever  since  the  introduction 
of  sin,  God  has  said,  "The  soul  that  sins,  it  shall  surely 
die;"  but  Satan  has  persistently  asserted  from  the  be- 
ginning, in  direct  contradiction  of  the  word  of  God, 
that  the  soul  that  sins  shall  not  surely  die. 

And  this  conflict  between  truth  and  falsehood  has 
been  raging  through  all  past  ages.  As  in  the  days  of 
the  prophet  Ezekiel,  so  is  it -now;  the  land  is  flooded 
with  lies  and  impostures.  Many  who  profess  to  be  lead- 
ers of  the  people  "prophesy  out  of  their  own  heart," 
and  will  not  obey  the  word  of  the  Lord;  "they  have 
seen  vanity  and  lying  divination,"  and  the  pulpits  of  the 
present  day  are  filled  with  "vanity  and  lying  divination." 
These  modern  deceivers  "follow  their  own  spirit;"  they 
"divine  lies,"  and  they  seduce  the  people  with  "visions/ 
of  peace"  when  "there  is  no  peace,  saith  the  Lord  God;" 
and  "with  lies"  they  make  "the  hearts  of  the  righteous 
sad  and  strengthen  the  hands  of  the  wicked,  that  he 
should  not  turn  from  his  wicked  way  by  promising  him 
life."  (Ezek.  xiii.) 

VI.  The  Bible  is  replete  with  illustrations  of  faith. 
Paul,  in  Heb.  xi. ,  furnishes  a  whole  chapter  of  noted 
exam [iles.  These  illustrious  characters  shall  live  on  in 
history  to  the  final  consummation.  Men  of  faith,  and 
only  men  of  faith  in  all  dispensations,  have  made  the 
desert  wastes  of  the  world  to  bloom  and  blossom  as  the 
rose.  Faith  in  God  and  confidence  in  his  word  hold 
the  moral  universe  together — hold  the  moral  govern- 
men.t  of  God  in  equipoise.  Infidelity  would  precipitate 
a  universal  crash.  Remove  such  men  of  faith  from  the 
calendar  of  the  first  four  thousand  years  of  the  world, 
as  Abel,  Enoch,  !N"oah,  Abraham,  Isaac,  Jacob,  Moses, 


REFORMATORY   MOVEMENTS.  £73 

Joseph,  Joshua,  David,  Samuel,  Samson,  Jeremiah, 
Ezekiel,  Isaiah,  Nehemiah  and  Daniel,  and  there  would 
be  nothing  left  worthy  of  contemplation  and  admiration. 
Where  men  of  faith  have  never  lived  and  have  never 
"  walked  with  God ;"  where  they  have  never  lived  in 
the  "fear"  of  God;  and  where  they  never  have  "en- 
dured as  seeing  him  who  is  invisible;"  and  where  men 
and  women,  as  "strangers  and  pilgrims  on  the  earth, '* 
have  not  obeyed  God,  seeing  the  "promises"  of  God 
"afar  oft'" — there  you  will  find  fields  of  desolation,  un- 
rest, spiritual  darkness,  human  misery,  starving  hearts 
and  thirsty  souls,  business  stagnation,  undeveloped 
powers,  the  dead  doctrine  of  fatalism,  gloomy  super- 
stition, groveling  idolatry,  selfishness,  sordidness,  hope- 
lessness, and  the  glamour  of  eternal  forgetful  ness.  Blot 
out  of  history  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  names 
of  his  apostles,  and  the  names  of  the  martyrs  of  God, 
and  the  names  of  all  philanthropists,  and  the  names  of 
all  reformers,  and  the  names  of  all  who  have  "walked 
with  God,"  and  you  have  nothing  left  to  contemplate 
but  a  base  world  of  blank  desolation.  It  is  a  paradise 
lost.  But  thanks  be  to  God  that  he  has  confirmed  his 
oath  by  two  immutable  things,  in  which  it  is  impossible 
for  him  to  lie,  that  "  we  might  have  a  strong  consola- 
tion, who  have  fled  for  refuge  to  lay  hold  upon  the  hope 
set  before  us;  which  hope  we  have  as  an  anchor  to  the 
ioul,  both  sure  and  steadfast,  and  which  enters  into  that 
within  the  vail ;  whither  the  forerunner  is  entered  for 
us,  even  Jesus."  (Heb.  vi.  18,  19.) 

REFORMATION   OF   LIFE. 

If  belief  in  testimony  produces  the  conviction  that 
Jesus  Christ  is  the  Son  of  God  and  the  hope  of  the  sin- 
ner, it  is  the  "goodness  of  God  that  leads  men  to  re- 


274  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

pentance."     (Rom.  ii.  4.)     Convicted  sinners  are  very 
apt  to  repent  of  their  sins.     Without  conviction  of  sin 
there  is  no  genuine  reformation  of  life.     Belief  in  testi- 
mony does  not  necessarily  result  in  conviction  of  sin. 
It  is  said  concerning  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  that  "among 
the  chief  rulers  also  many  believed  on  him;  but  because 
of  the  Pharisees  they  did  not  confess  him,  lest  they  should 
be  put  out  of  the  synagogue :  for  they  loved  the  praise 
of  men  more  than  the  praise  of  God."     (John  xii.  42.) 
The  testimonies  of  God  were  not  only  intended  to  illu- 
minate the  mind,  but  also,  through  conviction  of  sin, 
to  change  the  character  of  the  believer.     When,  like 
the  prodigal  son,  a  sinner  conies  to  himself,  he  will 
change  his  course  of  life  and  return  to  God.     Conscious 
of  his  helplessness  and  utter  unworthiness;    conscious 
of  guilt  with  a  sense  of  shame,  and  also  realizing  the 
infinite  mercy  and  goodness  of  God,  the  sinner  will  seek 
to  know  the  will  of  the  Lord,  and,  having  ascertained 
his  will,  he  will  hasten  to  carry  out,  in  overt  acts  of 
obedience,  the  conditions  of  that  will.     God  has  com- 
manded all  men  everywhere  to  repent — reform  ;  but  all 
men  do  not  reform,  though  satisfied  of  the  truth  of  the 
gospel.     Christ  told  the  apostles  that  when  the  Spirit 
came,  the  "Spirit  of  truth,"  or  the  truth  revealed  by 
the  Spirit,  whether  spoken  by  the  apostles  or  by  "faith- 
ful men,"  would  "convict  the  world  of  sin,  of  righteous- 
ness, and  of  judgment."    Men  thus  convicted  are  ready 
to  ci'}T  out,  "Men  and  brethren,  what  must  we  do  to  be 
saved?"     To  convince  men  of  the  truth  of  Christianity 
is  one  thing;  to  convict  them  of  sin  is  another  thing. 
Men  who  love  sin  more  than  they  love  God,  will  not 
reform  as  long  as  they  remain  in  that  condition  of  heart. 
John's  preaching  convicted  of  sin;  Christ's  preaching 
convicted  his  hearers  of  sin.    The  preaching  of  the  apos- 


REFORMATORY   MOVEMENTS.  275 

ties  had  the  same  effect.  Little  of  that  kind  of  preach- 
ing is  done  at  the  present  day,  hence  the  failure  in  pro- 
ducing reformation  of  life  in  thousands  who  hear  the 
truth  and  assent  to  it.  The  sensational  preachers  of 
this  age  induce  thousands  to  subscribe  to  the  fact  that 
Jesus  Christ  is  the  Son  of  God  and  the  Savior  of  men; 
but  in  less  than  six  months  from  the  time  they  gave  as- 
sent to  the  proposition,  they  lapse  back  into  the  world, 
for  the  reason,  first,  that  their  "converts,"  were  not 
grounded  in  the  truth  ;  and,  second,  because  they  were 
not  thoroughly  convicted  of  the  guilt  and  shame  of  sin. 
It  is  a  "  godly  sorrow"  that  leads  to  a  reformation  of 
life,  but  "the  sorrow  of  the  world  "  "works  death."  (1 
Cor.  vii.  10.) 

Paul,  before  the  Athenians,  announces  the  broad  prop- 
osition that  God  "now  commands  all  men  everywhere 
to  repent" — to  reform;  "because  he  has  appointed  a 
day  in  the  which  he  will  judge  the  whole  world  in  right- 
eousness by  that  man  whom  he  has  ordained;  whereof 
he  has  given  assurance  to  all  men  in  that  he  has  raised 
him  from  the  dead."  (Acts  xvii.  30,  31.) 

The  law  of  reformation  is  the  same  in  all  ages,  wheth- 
er under  the  law  of  Moses  or  under  the  gospel  of  Christ. 
God,  by  Jeremiah,  thus  spoke  to  the  house  of  Israel: 
"At  what  instant  I  shall  speak  concerning  a  nation,  and 
concerning  a  kingdom,  to  pluck  up  and  to  pull  clown, 
and  to  destroy  it;  if  that  nation  against  whom  I  have 
pronounced,  turn  from  their  evil  way,  I  will  repent  of 
the  evil  that  I  thought  [or  purposed]  to  do  unto  them. 
And  at  what  instant  I  shall  speak  concerning  a  nation, 
and  concerning  a  kingdom,  to  build  and  plant  it;  if  it 
do  evil  in  my  sight,  that  it  obey  not  my  voice,  then  I 
will  repent  of  the  good  wherewith  I  said  I  would  benefit 
it."  (Jer.  xviii.  7-10.)  Says  Isaiah:  "Seek  ye  the  Lord 


276  GOSPEL   PKINCIPLES. 

while  he  may  be  found,  call  ye  upon  him  while  he  is 
near:  let  the  wicked  forsake  his  way,  and  the  unright- 
eous man  his  thoughts:  and  let  him  return  unto  the 
Lord,  and  he  will  have  mercy  upon  him;  and  to  our 
God,  for  he  will  abundantly  pardon."  (Isa.  Iv.  6,  7.) 
This  principle  of  reformation  under  the  Jewish  economy, 
shows  that  when  the  violators  of  God's  law  "cut  off 
their  sins  by  righteousness" — by  obeying  the  voice  of 
the  Lord — he  will  turn  from  his  purpose  of  punishing 
them  and  pardon  them.  Under  John's  reformatory 
movement,  while  the  old  Jewish  covenant  was  still 
alive  and  in  force,  and  while  he  was  "preaching  the 
baptism  of  repentance  for  the  remission  of  sins,"  as  a 
work  under  the  law,  preparatory  to  the  actual  setting 
up  of  the  kingdom  of  Christ,  "the  people  asked  him, 
saying,  What  shall  we  do  then?  He  answers  and  says 
to  them,  He  that  has  two  coats,  let  him  impart  to  him 
who  has  none;  and  he  that  has  meat  [food],  lot  him  do 
likewise.  Then  came  also  publicans  to  be  baptized,  and 
said  to  him,  Master,  what  shall  we  do?  And  he  said  to 
them,  Exact  no  more  [or  extort  no  more  taxes  from  the 
people]  than  that  which  is  appointed  you.  And  the 
soldiers  likewise  demanded  of  him,  saying,  And  what 
shall  we  do?  And  he  said  to  them,  Do  violence  to  no 
man,  neither  accuse  any  falsely,  and  be  content  with 
your  wages"  —  as  those  in  the  Roman  Government. 
(Luke  iii.  10-14.)  John  was  unwilling  to  immerse  any 
one  who  did  not  "bring  forth  fruits  worthy  of  repent- 
ance." John  laid  the  axe  of  reform  "unto  the  root  of 
the  trees,"  and  when  he  saw  many  of  the  Pharisees  and 
Sadducees  come  to  his  baptism,  he  said  to  them:  "0 
brood  of  vipers,  who  has  warned  you  to  flee  from  the 
wrath  to  come?  Bring  forth,  therefore,  fruits  worthy 
of  repentance."  John,  as  a  Jewish  prophet  and  teacher, 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  277 

was  addressing  God's  people  under  the  law — addressing 
those  who  had  apostatized  from  the  faith  of  their  fathers. 
John  came  to  prepare  a  people  for  the  Lord — to  "  pre- 
pare the  way  of  the  Lord  " — but  after  the  Lord  came 
and  established  his  church  or  kingdom  by  his  apostles, 
the  preparatory  work  of  John  ceased.  A  more  thorough 
reformatory  work  was  inaugurated  by  the  apostles  of 
Jesus  Christ;  a  work  which  was  not  to  be  confined  to 
the  single  race  of  the  Jews,  but  which  was  intended  to 
extend  to  all  the  nations  of  the  earth,  "beginning  at 
Jerusalem.'' 

Before  Christ  ascended  on  high,  he  said  to  his  apos- 
tles:  "Thus  it  is  written,  and  thus  it  behooved  Christ 
to  suffer,  and  to  rise  from  the  dead  the  first  day:  and 
that  repentance  and  remission  of  sins  should  be  preach- 
ed in  his  name  among  all  nations,  beginning  at  Jerusa- 
lem." (Luke  xxiv.  46,  47.)  The  new  dispensation, 
under  Jesus  Christ,  was  inaugurated  on  the  memorable 
day  of  Pentecost.  Here  Reformation  of  life  and  remis- 
sion of  sins,  for  the  first  time,  was  preached  in  the  name 
of  the  risen,  coronated  and  glorified  King.  The  gospel 
in  fact  never  was  preached  until  the  apostle  Peter  preach- 
ed it — "Out  of  Zion  shall  go  forth  the  law  [of  "the 
Spirit  of  life"],  and  the  word  of  the  Lord  from  Jerusa- 
lem." (Isa.  ii.  3.)  Peter,  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  thus 
concluded  his  great  sermon,  as  addressed  to  the  Jews: 

This  Jesus  hath  God  raised  up,  whereof  we  arc  all 
witnesses.  Therefore,  being  by  the  right  hand  of  God 
exalted,  and  having  received  of  the  Father  the  promise 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  he  has  shed  forth  this,  which  you 
now  see  and  hear.  For  David  is  not  ascended  into  the 
heavens:  but  he  says  himself,  The  Lord  said  unto  my 
Lord,  Sit  thou  on  my  right  hand,  until  I  make  thy  foes 
thy  footstool.  Therefore  let  all  the  house  of  Israel  know 
assuredly,  that  God  has  made  that  same  Jesus,  whom  you 


278  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

have  crucified,  both  Lord  and  Christ.  Now  when  they 
heard  this,  they  were  pierced  in  their  heart,  and  said  to 
Peter  and  to  the  rest  of  the  apostles,  Men  and  brethren, 
what  shall  we  do?  Then  Peter  said  to  them,  Repent 
[reform  your  lives],  and  be  immersed  every  one  of  you 
in  the  name  of  [or  by  the  authority  of]  Jesus  Christ  for 
the  remission  of  sins,  and  you  shall  receive  the  gift  of 
the  Holy  Spirit.  For  the  promise  is  to  you  and  your 
children  [your  descendants],  and  to  all  who  are  afar  off, 
even  as  many  as  the  Lord  our  God  shall  call  [by  the  gos- 
pel. See  Rom.  x.  14,  15].  And  with  many  other  words 
did  he  testify  and  exhort,  saying,  Save  yourselves  from 
this  untoward  generation.  (Acts  ii.  32-40.) 

Here  were  three  thousand  sinners — the  "murderers 
and  betrayers  of  Jesus  Christ" — who  were  willing  to 
reform  their  lives;  and,  as  a  proof  of  genuine  reforma- 
tion, which  was  also  a  test  of  their  faith  in  the  glorified 
Christ,  they  were  willing  to  submit  to  the  positive  ordi- 
nance of  immersion,  which,  in  other  portions  of  apostolic 
teaching,  is  called  "the  obedience  to  the  faith,"  or  "that 
form  of  doctrine  which  was  delivered,"  and  which  they 
had  "-obeyed  from  the  heart."  (Rom.  i.  5,  and  vi.  17.) 

At  the  conclusion  of  the  second  sermon,  delivered  to 
the  same  people,  Peter  said:  "Repent  [reform]  ye,  there- 
fore, and  turn  [new  version],  that  your  sins  may  be  blot- 
ted out,  when  the  times  of  refreshing  shall  come  from 
the  presence  of  the  Lord."  (Acts  iii.  19.)  The  word 
"turn"  here  corresponds  with  immersion  in  the  first 
sermon;  "blotted  out"  corresponds  with  "remission  of 
sins;"  and  "the  times  of  refreshing"  corresponds  with 
"the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit,"  in  the  first  sermon.  In 
the  first  sermon,  the  order  stands  thus:  (1)  Reform,  (2) 
be  immersed,  (3)  remission  of  sins,  (4)  the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  As  Peter  would  not  contradict  himself, 
being  infallibly  directed  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  order 
of  the  second  sermon  stands  thus :  (1)  Reform,  (2)  turn 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  279 

(the  overt  act  of  immersion),  (3)  remission  or  (figurative- 
ly) the  blotting  out  of  sins,  (4)  the  gift  of  the  Spirit,  or 
times  of  refreshing.  If  repentance  is  not  mentioned  in 
every  case  of  conversion,  it  is  implied;  just  as  immersion 
is  implied  where  it  is  not  mentioned.  Genuine  repent- 
ance for  sin  leads  to  a  salvation  not  to  be  repented  of. 

Paul  makes  a  clear  distinction  between  a  godly  sorrow 
and  a  worldly  sorrow,  which  conditions  of  the  heart  are 
represented  in  the  original  Greek  by  two  different  words. 
He  thus  addresses  his  Corinthian  brethren: 

For  though  I  made  you  sorry  with  a  letter,  I  do  not 
repent,  though  I  did  repent:  for  I  perceive  that  the  same 
epistle  has  made  you  sorry,  though  it  were  but  for  a  sea- 
son. Now  I  rejoice,  not  that  you  were  made  sorry,  but 
that  you  sorrowed  to  repentance;  for  you  were  made  sorry 
after  &  godly  manner,  that  you  might  receive  damage  by 
us  in  nothing.  For  godly  sorrow  works  repentance  to  sal- 
vation not  to  be  repented  of;  but  the  sorrow  of  the  world 
works  death.  (2  Cor.  vii.  8-10.) 

When  the  "goodness  of  God"  leads  men  "to  repent- 
ance," being  deeply  convicted  of  sin,  and  they  reform 
their  lives  from  principle,  they  manifest  a  godly  sorrow. 
But  when  men  are  suddenly  taken  down  sick  and  think 
they  are  going  to  die,  they  become  alarmed  and  begin 
to  cry  for  help;  but  it  is  not  genuine  repentance,  because 
they  do  not  repent  through  love  for  God;  for,  though 
they  make  promises  of  reformation  upon  their  beds  ot 
sickness,  when  they  recover  they  become  worse  sinners 
than  they  were  before  their  sickness.  As  the  captured 
thief  is  not  sorry  because  he  has  stolen  goods,  but  sorry 
because  he  has  been  caught,  and  goes  to  stealing  again  as 
soon  as  he  is  liberated,  so  the  sinner,  whose  sorrow  is 
only  a  worldly  sorrow,  is  not  sorry  because  he  has  sinned 
against  6roa5,  but  sorry  because  God  has  capture/I  him  and 
laid  him  low  upon  a  bed  of  sickness;  for  when  restored 
23 


280  GOSPEL   PRINCIPLES. 

to  health,  though  in  his  extremity  he  lustily  called  upon 
God  for  help,  he  goes  off  and  sins  worse  than  ever.  This 
is  what  Paul  means  by  the  "sorrow  of  the  world  that 
works  death  " — eternal  death.  In  the  same  chapter  from 
which  we  have  quoted,  Paul  gives  the  result  of  genuine 
reformation,  in  the  following  words:  "For  behold  this 
selfsame  thing,  that  you  sorrowed  after  &  godly  sort,  what 
carefulness  it  wrought  in  you ;  yea,  what  clearing  of 
yourselves,  yea,  what  indignation,  yea,  what  fear,  yea, 
what  vehement  desire,  yea,  what  zeal,  yea,  what  revenge ! 
In  all  things  you  have  approved  yourselves  to  be  clear 
in  this  matter." 

These  are  the  fruits  of  pin  cere  and  abiding  reforma- 
tion. These  are  fruits  worthy  of  repentance.  Men  who 
cut  off  their  sins  by  righteous  acts — by  obeying  all  the 
commands  of  God — are  on  their  way  heavenward  and 
homeward.  Having  become  "the  sons  of  God"  by  being 
born  into  the  family  of  God,  they  continue  to  honor  that 
high  and  holy  relation  by  a  godly  walk  and  a  chaste 
conversation.  Having  become  "the  servants  of  right- 
eousness," they  have  "their  fruit  unto  holiness,"  and 
"the  end,  life  everlasting." 

THE  GOOD  CONFESSION. 

A  TRULY  penitent  believer  is  ready  to  confess  faith  in 
Christ  as  the  Son  of  God  and  as  his  Savior.  He  is  will- 
ing to  confess  publicly  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth  is  the 
Messiah  of  God.  In  making  this  public  profession,  the 
confessor  accepts  all  the  obligations  which  the  name  of 
Christ  carries  with  it.  If  need  be,  in  bearing  the  name 
of  Christ,  he  accepts  obloquy,  reproach,  persecution, 
imprisonment,  and  even  death  itself.  He  who  receives 
Christ  as  Prophet,  Priest  and  King,  and  as  the  Captain 
of  his  salvation,  and  as  his  Guide  and  Examplar,  will- 


REFORMATORY   MOVEMENTS.  -81 

ingly  assumes  all  the  obligations  which  his  public  pro- 
fession of  the  name  of  Christ  involves.  He  is  willing 
and  ready  to  step  at  the  command  of  his  great  Captain. 
He  who  is  thoroughly  persuaded  by  evidence  incon- 
trovertible that  Jesus  Christ  is  the  Son  of  God,  enlists 
in  his  service  with  a  high  and  holy  determination,  and 
with  no  mental  reservation,  to  follow  him  in  every  detail 
of  duty,  and  to  give  the  work  of  Christ  a  prominence 
above  any  other  work  he  may  engage  in.  Christ  is  very 
explicit  in  regard  to  those  who  confess  his  name.  He 
says:  "Whoever  therefore  shall  confess  me  before  men, 
him  will  I  confess  also  before  my  Father  who  is  in 
heaven.  But  whoever  shall  deny  me  before  men,  him 
will  I  also  deny  before  my  Father  who  is  in  heaven." 
(Matt.  x.  32,  33.)  Again  he  says:  "Whoever  shall  be 
ashamed  of  me  and  my  words,  of  him  shall  the  Son  of 
man  be  ashamed  when  he  shall  come  in  his  own  glory,  and 
in  his  Father's,  and  of  the  holy  angels."  (Luke  ix.  26.) 
Paul  says;  "I  am  not  ashamed  of  the  gospel  of 
Christ"  (Rom.  i.  16),  and  to  his  son  Timothy  he  writes: 
"Be  not  thou  ashamed  of  the  testimony  of  our  Lord, 
nor  of  me  his  prisoner;  but  be  thou  partaker  of  the 
afflictions  of  the  gospel  according  to  the  power  of  God." 
(2  Tim.  i.  8.)  Again,  quoting  from  Isaiah  xxviii.  16, 
Paul  says:  "As  it  is  written,  Behold,  I  lay  in  Zion  a 
stumbling  stone  and  rock  of  offense;  and  whoever  be- 
lieves on  him  shall  not  be  ashamed" — shall  not  be  con- 
founded. (Rom.  ix.  33.)  After  exhorting  Timothy  not 
to  be  ashamed  of  the  testimony  of  Christ,  and  after 
speaking  of  his  own  sufferings,  Paul  says:  "For  the 
which  cause  I  also  suffer  these  things;  nevertheless,  I 
am  not  ashamed,  for  I  know  whom  I  have  believed 
[trusted],  and  am  persuaded  that  he  is  able  to  keep  that 
which  I  have  committed  to  him  against  that  day." 


282  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

(2  Tim.  i.  12.)  And  in  the  sixteenth  verse  he  says, 
"and  [I]  was  not  ashamed  of  my  chain."  Hear  Paul 
again:  "For  it  became  him  for  whom  are  all  things, 
and  by  whom  are  all  things,  in  bringing  many  sons  unto 
glory,  to  make  the  Captain  of  their  palvation  perfect 
through  sufferings.  For  both  he  who  sanctifies  and 
they  who  are  sanctified  are  all  one;  for  which  cause  he 
is  not  ashamed  to  call  them  brethren,  saying,  I  will  de- 
clare thy  name  unto  my  brethren,  in  the  midst  of  the 
church  will  I  sing  praise  unto  thee.  And  again,  I  will 
put  my  trust  in  him.  And  again,  Behold  me  and  the 
children  which  God  has  given  me."  (Heb.  ii.  10-13.) 
And  of  the  righteous  of  all  ages  who  trust  in  God  and 
who  walk  by  faith,  Paul  says  that  "  God  is  not  ashamed 
to  be  called  their  God."  (Heb.  xi.  16.) 

The  good  confession  only  embraces  one  article  of  faith, 
but  it  is  comprehensive  of  all  that  can  be  confessed  con- 
cerning Christ,  and  here  it  is:  "And  many  other  signs 
truly  did  Jesus  in  the  presence  of  his  disciples,  which 
are  not  written  in  this  book;  but  these  are  written  that 
you  might  believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of 
God;  and  that,  believing,  you  might  have  life  through 
his  name."  (Jno.  xx.  30,  31.)  An  illustration  of  what 
confession  means  is  seen  in  the  conversion  of  the 
Ethiopian  eunuch:  "And  as  they  went  on  their  way 
they  came  to  a  certain  water;  and  the  eunuch  said,  See 
.  .  .  water;  what  doth  hinder  me  to  be  baptized?  And 
Philip  said,  If  thou  belie  vest  with  all  thine  heart,  thou 
mayest.  And  he  answered  and  said,  /  believe  that  Jesus 
Christ  is  the  Son  of  God."  (Acts  viii.  36,  37.)  What 
more  can  a  man  believe  than  to  believe  with  all  his  heart? 
If  a  man  believes  with  all  his  heart,  he  gives  his  whole 
heart  to  God;  for  the  word  "heart"  is  frequently  used 
in  the  Scriptures  to  represent  the  entire  man — body,  soul 


REFORMATORY   MOVEMENTS.  283 

and  spirit — as  for  instance  when  God  says,  "  Son,  give 
me  thine  heart;"  or,  as  Christ  says,  "Where  your 
treasure  is,  there  will  your  heart  be  also."  When  a 
patriot  is  asked,  in  time  of  war,  to  lay  his  heart  upon 
the  altar  of  his  country,  every  one  knows  that  it  moans 
the  entire  consecration  of  his  life — money,  time  and 
influence,  and  even  the  offering  up  of  his  body — to  the 
service  of  his  country. 

Any  ordinary  intellect  can  make  the  "good  confes- 
sion," and  take  in  the  full  meaning  of  confessing  the 
name  of  Christ,  but  no  living  soul  can  comprehend  the 
Thirty-nine  Articles  which  some  of  the  orthodox  creeds 
contain.  These  Articles  confuse,  and  mislead,  and 
make  the  word  of  God  of  none  effect.  The  simplest 
soul,  upon  the  testimony  of  the  prophets  and  apostles, 
can  say,  and  say  it  intelligently,  "I  believe  that  Jesus 
Christ  is  the  Son  of  God."  There  is  encouragement  to 
a  believer  in  this,  but  a  man  of  reason  and  of  intelligent 
faith  will  turn  away  in  disgust,  and  in  pardonable  un- 
belief, from  metaphysical  and  scholastic  articles  of  faith 
— the  production  of  fallible  and  foolish  men.  Paul 
writes  to  his  son  Timothy  thus :  "  Fight  the  good  tight 
of  faith,  lay  hold  on  eternal  life,  whereunto  thou  art 
also  called,  and  hast  professed  a  good  profession  before 
many  witnesses.  I  give  thee  charge  in  the  sight  of  God, 
who  quickens  all  things,  and  before  Christ  Jesus,  who 
before  Pontius  Pilate  witnessed  a  good  confession ;  that 
thou  keep  his  commandment  without  spot,  unrebukable, 
until  the  appearing  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ."  (1  Tim. 
vi.  12-14.)  The  same  Greek  word  which  is  here  trans- 
lated "confession,"  in  verse  twelve  is  translated  "pro- 
fession," and  refers  to  the  fact  that  the  Lord  Jesus, 
when  standing  at  the  bar  of  Pilate,  who  claimed  to  have 
power  over  his  life,  did  not  shrink  from  an  open  avowal 


284  GOSPEL   PRINCIPLES. 

of  the  truth.  Timothy,  no  doubt,  witnessed  a  good 
confession  wl^en  'he  iirst  espoused  the  cause  of  Christ, 
and  made  a  public  profession  of  it  in  the  presence  of  the 
congregation  and  of  the  world,  which,  doubtless,  was 
the  practice  in  the  primitive  order  of  things.  "Such  a 
method,"  says  Barnes,  "of  admitting  members  to  the 
church  would  have  been  natural,  and  would  have  been 
fitted  to  make  a  deep  impression  on  others.  It  is  a  good 
thing  often  to  remind  professors  of  religion  of  the  feel- 
ings which  they  had  when  they  made  a  profession  of 
religion;  of  the  fact  that  the  transaction  was  witnessed 
by  the  world;  and  of  the  promises  which  they  then 
made  to  lead  holy  lives.  One  of  the  best  ways  of  stimu- 
lating ourselves  or  others  to  the  faithful  performance  of 
duty,  is  the  remembrance  of  the  vows  then  made;  and 
one  of  the  most  effectual  methods  of  reclaiming  a  back- 
slider, is  to  bring  to  his  remembrance  that  solemn  hour 
when  he  publicly  gave  himself  to  God." 

Paul,  in  his  epistle  to  the  Romans,  makes  allusion  to 
the  good  confession  in  these  words:  "The  word  is  nigh 
thee,  even  in  thy  mouth,  and  in  thy  heart;  that  is,  the 
word  of  faith,  which  we  preach;  that  if  thou  shalt  con- 
fess with  thy  mouth  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  shalt  believe  in 
thy  heart  that  God  has  raised  him  from  the  dead,  thou 
shalt  be  saved;  for  with  the  heart  man  believes  unto 
righteousness;  and  with  the  mouth  confession  is  made 
unto  [or  in  order  to]  salvation."  (Rom.  x.  8-10.)  Even 
in  the  days  of  Christ's  personal  ministration  on  earth, 
it  was  deemed  both  unsafe  and  unpopular  to  confess  his 
name.  Hence  the  refusal  of  the  parents  to  tell  who  it 
was  that  cured  their  eon  of  his  blindness;  "because  they 
feared  the  Jews;  for  the  Jews  had  agreed  already,  that 
if  any  man  did  confess  that  he  was  Christ,  he  should  be 
put  out  of  the  synagogue."  (Jno.  ix.  22.) 


REFORMATORY    MOVEMENTS.  285 

There  are  plenty  of  people  at  this  present  time  who, 
like  the  man  and  woman  referred  to,  would  far  rather 
deny  the  truth  which  brought  Christ  to  the  cross,  and, 
if  possible,  avoid  the  consequences  of  following  that 
truth,  than  to  be  cast  out  of  orthodox  synagogues,  and 
thus  lose  caste  in  fashionable  society.  There  are  thous- 
ands of  nominal  Christians  who  follow  Christ  afar  off, 
and  who  deem  it  safe  and  honorable  to  acknowledge  a 
historical  Christ;  but  the  very  moment  you  ask  them  to 
take  up  the  cross,  and  to  follow  him  through  good  and 
evil  report — to  humble  themselves  by  obeying  his  com- 
mands— to  go  down  into  the  water  to  be  buried  in  the 
likeness  of  his  death — then  it  is  that  they  ask  to  be 
excused,  and  turn  away  from  the  despised  i^azarene. 
They  may  not  feel  ashamed  of  the  great  historical 
character,  in  his  glory  and  exaltation,  in  his  triumphal 
march  among  the  nations,  and  in  his  mighty  conquests, 
which  he  accomplishes  by  unseen  and  providential 
agencies,  but  they  are  "ashamed  of  his  words;"  that  is, 
individually,  they  are  not  willing  to  obey  his  "words," 
which,  if  obeyed,  would  humble  them  in  the  eyes  of  the 
world.  He  who  receives  the  words  of  Christ,  which  he 
says  will  judge  him  in  the  last  day,  becomes  an  humble 
man,  a  godly  man,  a  praying  man,  a  self-denying  man, 
a  generous-hearted  and  philanthropic  man.  There  are 
many  people  who,  in  synagogues  of  fashion,  will  pay 
tithes  of  anise  and  cummin  and  frankincense,  and  all 
sorts  of  highly  flavored  spices,  but  who,  when  called 
upon  to  deal  out  love  and  mercy  and  truth,  which  are 
the  weightier  matters  of  the  law,  will  practically  deny 
Jesus  Christ.  Many  will  follow  him  for  the  miracle  of 
the  loaves  and  fishes,  but  turn  away  from  him  the  mo- 
ment he  inculcates  truth  and  righteousness.  Many  are 
willing  to  adore  Christ  as  King  and  Conqueror,  and 


286  GOSPEL    PHIXCIPLES. 

ready  to  "crown  him  Lord  of  all,"  and  sing  hallelujahs 
to  him  as  "Prince  of  Peace,"  who,  if  called  upon,  would 
refuse  to  assist  him  in  bearing  his  cross;  would  refuse 
to  watch  with  him  at  the  garden  of  Gethsemane;  would 
refuse  to  follow  him  to  the  cross;  would  deny  him  in 
the  presence  of  his  persecutors;  would  desert  him  in  the 
agonies  of  death.  But  the  glorious  Paul  says,  "  For  me 
to  live  is  Christ;  for  me  to  die  is  gain" — the  gain  of  the 
glory  of  God. 

IMMERSION. 

We  use  the  term  immersion,  because  that  is  the  term 
that  should  be  employed  invariably  by  a  people  engaged 
in  a  reformatory  movement,  that  has  for  its  end  and  ob- 
ject the  complete  restoration  of  the  apostolic  order  of 
things.  The  Bible  does  not  speak  of  "modes  of  immer- 
sion," but  speaks  of  "  one  immersion  " — of  one  specific 
act  which  conveys  only  one  distinct  idea. 

Among  honest  and  educated  men  there  is  no  contro- 
versy on  the  subject  of  immersion.  The  controversy 
rests  upon  the  assertion  that  sprinkling  or  pouring  will 
answer  the  same  purpose,  an  assumption  wholly  unwar- 
ranted, and  as  such  it  must  be  regarded  as  a  direct  vio- 
lation of  the  law  of  God,  and  therefore  a  grievous  sin. 

Immersion  is  a  necessary  element  in  the  plan  of  sal- 
vation. It  is  ordained  as  one  of  the  conditions  upon 
which  is  suspended  the  salvation  of  the  sinner.  The 
command  to  be  immersed  emanates  from  the  Head  of 
the  Church — from  Jesus  the  Christ,  who  has  all  author- 
ity both  in  heaven  and  upon  the  earth.  We  find  no 
"non-essentials"  in  the  economy  of  divine  grace;  but 
we  do  find  that  wicked  and  designing  men  pronounce 
immersion  a  "  non-essential,"  which  they  do  at  the  peril 
of  eternal  reprobation.  All  the  commands  of  Jesus 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  287 

Christ  are  essential  to  salvation.  If  not,  why  should 
they  be  commanded?  Immersion  is  a  divine  positive 
institution,  authorized  by  the  infinite  God,  for  the  ordi- 
nation of  which  he  presumes  to  give  no  reason  to  mortal 
men. 

It  is  enough  for  us  to  know  that  God,  through  Jesus 
Christ,  has  ordained  it,  and  that  acceptance  with  God 
and  remission  of  sins  depend  upon  its  observance.  If 
Jesus  Christ  is  the  Son  of  God,  as  we  verily  believe, 
there  is  no  escape  from  this  conclusion. 

If  we  believe  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God, 
and  that  we  have  life  through  his  name,  then  immersion 
into  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  becomes  an  act  of  faith.  If  we  can  reject 
one  command  we  can  reject  all,  because,  in  rejecting  one, 
we  not  only  show  that  we  have  no  faith  in  the  Son  of 
God  as  our  Savior,  but  we  also  insult  the  majesty  of  the 
law-maker.  An  inspired  apostle  says:  "He  who  keeps 
the  whole  law,  and  yet  offends  in  one  point,  is  guilty 
of  all."  The  very  fact  that  the  ordinance  of  immersion, 
or  rather  the  negative  of  immersion,  has  been  the  source 
of  endless  controversy  from  the  beginning  of  the  apos- 
tasy down  to  the  present  time,  not  only  shows  the  rebel- 
liousness of  the  human  heart  in  undertaking  to  change 
the  ordinance  of  God,  but  also  shows,  with  peculiar 
emphasis,  what  importance  is  attached  to  it.  It  is  evi- 
dent that  the  Lord  intended  immersion  as  a  test  to  the 
carnal  heart.  It  is  intended  as  a  radical  test  of  faith 
and  obedience.  Some  other  test  would  accord  with  the 
divine  government  just  as  well,  if  the  Lord  had  so  or- 
dained. Christ  says,  "Whoever  humbles  himself  shall 
be  exalted,"  and  whoever  denies  himself  and  takes  up 
his  cross,  may  become  a  disciple  of  Christ;  and  we  feel 
sure  that  there  is  nothing  more  wisely  intended  to  hum- 


283  GOSPEL   PRINCIPLES. 

blc  the  proud  heart  of  the  sinner,  than  his  utter  help- 
lessness in  the  waters  of  baptism,  while  in  the  hands  of 
the  administrator.  If  the  belief  of  a  lie  and  the  viola- 
tion of  a  divine  positive  command — the  eating  of  the 
forbidden  fruit — in  the  garden  of  Eden,  merited  the 
disfavor  of  God,  and  was  the  cause  of  their  banishment 
from  his  presence;  certainly,  by  the  same  parity  of  rea- 
soning, an  antidote  to  that  fatal  sin  is  found  in  the  gos- 
pel, where  the  belief  of  the  truth  and  the  honoring  of 
a  divine  positive  institution  restore  the  penitent  believer 
to  the  favor  of  God,  who  receives  him  back  as  a  prodigal 
and  remits  all  his  sins.  Christ  says  in  the  most  positive 
language,  "  Except  a  man  be  born  of  water  and  of  the 
Spirit  he  can  not  enter  the  kingdom  of  God."  Preachers 
— "false  teachers" — will  brazenly  stand  up  and  tell  the 
people  that  they  can  enter  the  kingdom  of  God  without 
being  born  of  water.  When  the  Lord  placed  an  inter- 
dict upon  the  tree  of  the  knowledge  of  good  and  evil, 
he  said  to  Adam  and  Eve,  "  In  the  day  thou  eatest  there- 
of thou  shall  surely  die,"  or  "dying  thou  shalt  surely 
die."  But  Satan,  transformed  into  an  angel  of  light, 
comes  forward  and  puts  in  a  negative,  and  contradicts 
the  Almighty  by  saying,  "In  the  day  thou  eatest  there- 
of thou  shalt  not  surely  die;"  and  that  controversy  be- 
tween light  and  darkness  has  been  going  on  ever  since. 
Just  before  Christ  ascended  into  the  heavens  he  placed 
in  the  hands  of  the  apostles  the  great  commission,  which 
says:  "All  power  is  given  to  me  in  heaven  and  in  earth. 
Go  you,  therefore,  and  make  disciples  of  all  nations, 
immersing  them  into  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of 
the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit;  teaching  them  to  ob- 
serve all  things  whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you." 
In  harmony  with  this  commission,  and  under  the  guid- 
ance of  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  apostle  Peter,  in  answer  to 


Ill' FORM ATORY   MOVEMENTS.  289 

three  thousand  convicted  sinners  on  the  clay  of  Pente- 
cost, said,  by  the  authority  of  the  coronated  and  glorified 
King:, "Repent,  and  be  immersed  every  one  of  you  in 
the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,  for  the  remission  of  sins,  and 
you  shall  receive  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit."  If  the 
"Pharisees  and  lawyers  rejected  the  counsel  of  God 
against  themselves,  being  not  baptized  of  him,"  what 
will  the  end  of  them  be  who  reject  the  ordinance  of  the 
Son  of  God? 

Thus  have  we  briefly  established  the  authority  and 
the  necessity  of  immersion.  The  man  who  is  not  dis- 
posed to  be  hypercritical  and  skeptical,  and  who  is  an 
honest  and  patient  investigator  of  the  written  testimony, 
asks  no  further  proof  than  that  which  is  recorded  by 
the  sacred  historians.  The  importance  of  the  institu- 
tion is  shown  by  the  fact  that  the  word  immerse,  with 
its  cognates,  is  used  about  one  hundred  times  in  the 
New  Testament.  It  is  used  about  eighty  times  in  con- 
nection with  the  ordinance  of  immersion.  We  learn  by 
the  very  best  authorities — lexical,  philological,  archaeo- 
logical and  historical — that  the  original  word  fta--t'^io 
(baptizo)  never  means  to  sprinkle  or  to  pour,  not  even 
metaphorically.  Baptism  is  not  an  English  word,  but 
it  is  a  Greek  word  anglicized;  i.  e,,  it  has  an  English 
termination.  As  immerse,  sprinkle  and  pour  are  three 
specific  words,  having  three  specific  meanings,  and,  as 
such,  can  not  be  used  interchangeably  without  making 
nonsense,  the  word  baptizo  must  either  mean  specifically 
immerse,  or  sprinkle  or  pour.  If  it  means  specifically 
immerse,  then  sprinkle  and  pour  can  not  be  included. 
If  it  means  specifically  sprinkle,  then  immerse  and  pour 
can  not  be  included;  or  if  it  means  specifically  pour, 
then  the  other  two  definitions  can  not  be  included.  And 
if  all  these  words  with  specific  and  distinct  meanings 


290  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

are  definitions  of  the  word  bctptizo,  then  no  man  is  bap- 
tized until  he  passes  the  three  ordeals  of  immerse,  ponr 
and  sprinkle,  which  is  absurd  and  ridiculous.  Especially 
is  this  made  manifest  in  the  fact  that  when  an  object  is 
immersed  the  object  is  plunged  beneath  the  water;  that 
is  to  say,  the  subject  is  applied  to  the  element;  whereas, 
when  sprinkling  (5r  pouring  takes  place,  the  water  or 
the  element  is  applied  to  the  subject.  In  immersing,  the 
subject  is  put  under  the  water;  in  pouring  or  sprinkling, 
the  water  is  poured  upon  or  sprinkled  upon  the  subject 
with  the  hand  or  with  some  kind  of  pot.  In  primitive 
times  the  people  went  to  the  water  in  order  to  bury  sub- 
jects or  candidates  in  the  likeness  of  Christ's  death.  In 
modern  times  the  water — a  "teenty  little''  cup  full — is 
conveyed  to  the  people  !  In  view  of  these  facts  and  con- 
trasts we  ask,  "Which  is  the  right  way  ? 

There  is  not  a  version  of  the  Scriptures  in  existence, 
among  all  the  nations,  in  which  the  original  Greek  word 
is  translated  either  pour  or  sprinkle.  No  scholar  dare 
risk  his  reputation  in  so  translating  the  word.  In  a 
small  volume  entitled,  "Baptism :  Its  Meaning  and  Use," 
published  by  the  American  Bible  Union,  the  erudite  edi- 
tor, Dr.  Conant,  has  traced  out  the  meaning  of  the  word 
in  classic  Greek  literature,  there  being  some  one  hundred 
and  fifty  occurrences  of  the  word  in  all,  and  in  each 
particular  case  he  shows  that  the  meaning  of  the  word 
is  uniformly  the  same,  without  one  exception.  IsTo  one, 
so  far  as  we  know,  has  ever  attempted  to  contradict  the 
statement  of  Dr.  Conant.  He  triumphantly  shows  that 
in  every  instance  it  means  immerse.  Pedobaptist  schol- 
ars concede  that  the  word  does  usually  convey  this  sense 
in  classic  Greek,  while  at  the  same  time  they  assume  that 
it  sometimes  signifies  ll  wash,"  "  die,"  "  stain,"  etc.  But 
it  is  a  significant  fact  that  in  classic  Greek  they  never 


REFORMATORY   MOVEMENTS.  291 

translate  it  "pour"  or  "sprinkle."  They  also  assume 
that  in  the  New  Testament  it  is  not  used  in  its  classic 
sense.  Some  Greek  lexicons  give  "wash, "  "dye,"  "stain" 
as  meanings  of  the  word,  but  generally  as  secondary 
meanings,  some  of  them  being  so  cautious  as  to  say 
that  it  conveys  such  meanings  only  by  consequence;  no- 
tably, Bailey,  who  says  that  "baptism,  in  strictness  of 
speech,  is  that  kind  of  washing  which  consists  in  dip- 
ping, and  when  applied  to  the  Christian  institution  so- 
called,  it  was  used  by  the  primitive  Christians  in  no  other 
sense  than  that  of  dipping."  ("Lex.  Theol.,"  p.  221.) 
A  thing  immersed  may  be  washed,  dyed  or  stained,  as 
a  consequence  of  immersion.  "Whether  dyed,  or  washed, 
or  stained,  depends  upon  the  character  of  the  element 
in  which  the  immersion  takes  place.  By  metonymy  of 
speech,  consequences  of  an  action  may  be  substituted 
for  the  action  itself.  In  this  way  frequently  the  words 
wash,  dye,  stain,  soil,  etc.,  are  put  for  the  English  word 
dip.  As  for  example,  when  the  dyer  dips  an  article  into 
the  dye-stuff,  it  is  said  he  dyes  it,  when,  in  exactness  of 
language,  he  dips  it,  and,  as  a  consequence,  it  is  dyed. 
When,  therefore,  the  washer  dips  the  same  article  into 
water  it  is  said  that  he  washes  it,  when,  in  fact,  the  ar- 
ticle washed  is  only  a  consequence  of  the  dipping  in 
water.  Shall  we,  therefore,  conclude  that  wash  is  the 
meaning  of  the  word  dip?  By  metonymy  of  speech,  a 
person  or  thing  may  be  said  to  be  immersed,  as  an  effect, 
by  being  thoroughly  drenched  in  a  rain  shower.  The 
effect  is  the  same  as  though  the  person  were  immersed. 
In  translating  words  from  one  language  into  another, 
the  rule  is  always  to  translate  by  the  primary  meaning 
of  the  word  as  given  in  the  lexicons,  unless  the  connec- 
tion makes  it  necessary  to  use  a  word  of  secondary 
meaning,  which  has  never  yet  been  done  in  translating 


292  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

the  \vord  baptizo.  In  regard  to  rules  of  interpretation, 
Sir  William  Blackstone,  an  eminent  authority  in  law 
and  jurisprudence,  says:  "Words  of  a  law  are  generally 
to  be  understood  in  their  usual  and  most  known  signi- 
fication, not  so  much  regarding  the  propriety  of  gram- 
mar as  their  general  and  popular  use." 

We  frequently  hear  persons  say,  "If  ever  I  become  a 
Christian,  I  will  be  immersed."  Why  do  they  say  so? 
Because  they  prefer  to  take  a  certainty  for  an  uncertain- 
ty, and  because  there  is  no  controversy  in  regard  to  the 
validity  of  immersion.  As  sprinkle  and  pour  have  al- 
ways been  held  in  doubt,  since  they  were  introduced  in 
the  apostasy  of  the  Church,  wise  and  conscientious  men 
discard  the  doubtful  and  choose  that  which  is  positively 
true. 

Dean  Stanley,  one  of  the  great  modern  lights  of  the 
Church  of  England,  in  tracing  out  the  history  and 
meaning  of  "baptism,"  says: 

"What,  then,  was  baptism  in  the  apostolic  age?  It 
coincided  with  the  greatest  religious  change  which  the 
world  has  yet  witnessed.  Multitudes  of  men  and  wo- 
men were  seized  with  one  common  impulse,  and  aban- 
doned, by  the  irresistible  conviction  of  a  day,  an  hour, 
a  moment,  their  former  habits,  friends,  associates,  to  be 
enrolled  in  a  new  society,  under  the  banner  of  a  new 
faith.  That  new  society  was  intended  to  be  a  society 
of  'brothers,'  bound  by  ties  closer  than  any  earthly 
brotherhood — filled  with  life  and  energy,  such  as  fall  to 
the  lot  of  none  but  the  most  ardent  enthusiasts,  yet 
tempered  by  a  moderation,  a  wisdom  and  a  holiness  such 
as  enthusiasts  have  rarely  possessed.  It  was,  moreover, 
a  society  swayed  by  the  presence  of  men  whose  words 
even  now  cause  the  heart  to  burn,  and  by  the  recent 
recollections  of  One,  whom  'not  seeing  they  loved  with 


REFORMATORY    MOVEMENTS.  293 

love  unspeakable.'     Into  this  society  they  passed  by  an 
act  as  natural  as  it  was  expressive.     The  plunge  into 
the  bath  of  purification,  long  known  among  the  Jewish 
nation  as  the  symbol  of  a  change  of  life,  was  still  re- 
tained as  the  pledge  of  entrance  into  this  new  and  uni- 
versal communion — retained  under  the  sanction  of  Him 
into  whose  name  they  were  by  that  solemn  rite  'baptized.' 
In  that  early  age  the  scene  of  the  transaction  was  either 
some  deep  wayside  spring  or  well,  as  for  the  Ethiopian, 
or  some    rushing   river,  as   the   Jordan,  or   some   vast 
reservoir,  as  at  Jericho  or  Jerusalem,  whither,  as  in  the 
baths  of  Caracalla  at  Rome,  the  whole  population  re- 
sorted for  swimming  or  washing.     The  water  in  those 
Eastern  regions,  so  doubly  significant  of  all  that  was 
pure  and  refreshing,  closed  over  the  heads  of  the  con- 
verts and  they  rose  into  the  light  of  heaven  new  and 
altered  beings.     It  was  natural  that  on  such  an  act  were 
lavished  all  the  figures  which  language  could  furnish  to 
express   the    mighty   change:    'regeneration,'    'illumi- 
nation,' 'burial,'   'resurrection,'  'a  new  creature,'  'for- 
giveness of  sins,'  'salvation.'     Well  might  the  apostle 
say,  'Baptism  doth  even  now  save  us,'  even  had  he  left 
his   statement   in  its  unrestricted   strength  to    express 
what  in  that  age  no  one  conld  misunderstand.     But  no 
less  well  was  he  led  to  add,  as  if  with  a  prescience  of 
coming  evils,  'Not  the  putting  away  the  filth  of  the 
flesh,  but  the  answer  of  a  good  conscience  toward  God.' " 
The  article  from  which  this  is  quoted  appeared  in  the 
Nineteenth  Century  for  October,  1879,  only  a  short  time 
before  the  author  passed  on  to  the  final  Grand  Assize. 
This  he  pronounces  "the  apostolic  baptism."     After 
showing   what   "was  the   apostolic  baptism,"  he   then 
traces  "in  detail"  "its  history  through  the  next  three 
centuries,"  and  shows  how  the  ordinance  was  abused, 


294  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

how  it  was  perverted  from  its  original  design,  and  how 
by  crafty  men  it  was  tortured  into  an  object  of  super- 
stition. Referring  to  the  "second  characteristic  of  the 
act  of  baptism,"  Stanley  says  in  the  same  article: 

"Baptism  was  not  only  a  bath,  but  a  plunge — an 
entire  submersion  in  the  deep  water,  a  leap  as  into  the 
roiling  sea  or  the  rushing  river,  where  for  the  moment 
the  waves  closed  over  the  bather's  head  and  he  emerges 
again  as  from  a  momentary  grave;  or  it  was  the  shock 
of  a  shower-bath — the  rush  of  water  passed  over  the 
whole  person  from  capacious  vessels,  so  as  to  wrap  the 
recipient  as  within  the  veil  of  a  splashing  cataract  [Here 
Stanley  quotes  from  Dr.  Smith's  History  of  Christain 
Antiquities,  vol.  i.  p.  169 — ED.  REVIEW].  This  was  the 
part  of  the  ceremony  on  which  the  apostles  laid  so 
much  stress.  It  seemed  to  them  like  a  burial  of  the  old 
former  self  and  the  rising  up  again  of  the  uew  self.  So 
St.  Paul  compared  it  to  the  Israelites  passing  through 
the  roaring  waves  of  the  Red  Sea,  and  St.  Peter,  to  the 
passing  through  the  deep  waters  of  the  flood.  'We 
are  buried,'  said  St.  Paul,  'with  Christ  by  baptism  at 
his  death;  that  like  as  Christ  was  raised,  thus  we  also 
should  walk  in  the  newness  of  life.'*  Baptism  as  the 
entrance  into  the  Christian  society  was  a  complete  change 
from  the  old  superstitions  or  restrictions  of  Judaism  to 
the  freedom  and  confidence  of  the  gospel.  It  was  a 
complete  change  from  the  idolatries  and  profligacies  of 
the  old  heathen  world  to  the  light  and  purity  of  Chris- 
tianity. It  was  a  change  effected  only  by  the  same 
effort  and  struggle  as  that  with  which  a  strong  swimmer 
or  an  adventurous  diver  throws  himself  into  the  stream 
and  struggles  with  the  waves,  and  comes  up  with  in- 
creased energy  out  of  the  depths  of  the  dark  abyss." 

*Rom.  vi.  4;   i  Cor.  x.  2;  2  Pet.  iii.  20,  21. 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  295 

In  all  his  statements  made  up  to  this  point,  he  does 
not  give  out  even  an  intimation  that  he  believed  that 
rantism  or  affusion — sprinkling  or  pouring — was  prac- 
ticed in  the  apostolic  age.  The  Dean  indulges  in  a 
good  deal  of  rhetorical  vaulting,  and  plays  with  tropes 
and  figures  of  speech  as  a  child  with  a  rattle,  but  his 
testimony  is  not  invalidated  by  his  superfluous  language. 
After  noting  the  many  changes  that  took  place  during 
the  apostasy  of  the  Church  in  the  form,  design  and 
subjects  of  baptism,  the  erudite  Dean  stultifies  history, 
philology  and  his  own  reasoning  powers  by  what  follows: 

We  now  pass  to  the  change  in  the  form  itself.  For 
the  first  thrirteen  centuries  the  almost  universal  practice 
of  baptism  was  that  of  \vhich  we  read  in  the  Xew  Testa- 
ment and  which  is  the  very  meaning  of  the  word 
"  baptize  "* — that  those  who  were  baptized  were  plunged, 
submerged,  immersed  into  the  water.  That  practice  is 
still,  as  we  have  seen,  continued  in  Eastern  churches. 
In  the  Western  church  it  still  lingers  amongst  Roman 
Catholics  in  the  solitary  instance  of  the  cathedral  of 
Milan,  amongst  Protestants  in  the  austere  sect  of  the 
Baptists.  It  lasted  long  into  the  Middle  Ages.  Even 
the  Icelanders,  who  at  first  shrank  from  the  water  of 
their  freezing  lakes,  were  reconciled  when  they  found 
that  they  could  use  the  warm  water  of  the  Geysers. 
And  the  cold  climate  of  Russia  has  not  been  found  an 
obstacle  to  its  continuance  throughout  the  vast  Empire. 
Even  in  the  Church  of  England  it  is  still  observed  in 
theory.  Elizabeth  and  Edward  the  Sixth  were  both 
immersed.  The  rubric  in  the  Public  Baptism  for  Infants 
enjoins  that,  unless  for  special  cases,  they  are  to  be 
dipped,  not  sprinkled.  But  in  practice  it  gave  way 
since  the  beginning  of  the  seventeenth  century.  With 
the  few  exceptions  just  mentioned,  the  whole  Western 
churches  have  now  substituted  for  the  ancient  bath  the 
ceremony  of  sprinkling  a  few  drops  of  water  oil  the 

*  It  is  also  the  meaning  of  the  word  taufen  ("  dip  "). 

24 


296  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

face.  The  reason  of  the  change  is  obvious.  The  prac- 
tice ot  immersion,  apostolic  and  primitive  as  it  was,  was 
peculiarly  suitable  to  the  Southern  and  Eastern  countries 
for  which  it  was  designed,  and  peculiarly  unsuitable  to 
the  tastes,  the  convenience  and  the  feelings  of  the 
countries  of  the  North  and  West.  Not  by  any  decree 
of  Council  or  Parliament,  but  by  the  general  sentiment 
of  Christian  liberty,  this  great  change  was  effected.  Not 
beginning  till  the  thirteenth  century,  it  has  gradually 
driven  the  ancient  Catholic  usage  out  of  the  whole  of 
Europe.  There  is  no  one  who  would  now  wish  to  go 
back  to  the  old  practice.  It  had  no  doubt  the  sanction 
of  the-apostles  and  of  their  Master.  It  had  the  sanction 
of  the  venerable  churches  of  the  early  ages,  and  of  the 
sacred  countries  of  the  East.  Baptism  by  sprinkling 
was  rejected  by  the  whole  ancient  church  (except  in  the 
rare  case  of  death-beds  or  extreme  necessity)  as  no 
baptism  at  all.  Almost  the  first  exception  was  the 
heretic  Novatian.  It  still  has  the  sanction  of  the  power- 
ful religious  community  which  numbers  amongst  its 
members  such  noble  characters  as  John  Bunyan,  Robert 
Hall  and  llavelock.  In  a  version  of  the  Bible  which 
the  Baptist  Church  has  compiled  for  its  own  use  in 
America,  where  it  excels  in  numbers  all  but  the  Metho- 
dists, it  is  thought  necessary,  and  on  philological  grounds 
it  is  quite  correct,  to  translate  John  the  Baptist  by  John 
the  Immerser. 

Not  as  an  honest  historian,  not  as  a  faithful  philologist, 
not  as  a  profound  linguist,  and  not  as  a  conscientious 
interpreter  of  God's  word,  does  he  assert  that  "  this  great 
change  was  effected"  "  by  the  general  sentiment  of  Christian 
liberty"  but  as  a  churchman — a  high  churchman  at  that 
•- — as  a  sectarian,  as  a  defender  of  infant  baptism,  as  an 
apologist  for  sprinkling  and  pouring,  and  as  a  vindicator 
of  "our  Church,'''  he  makes  these  bold  and  indefensible 
and  unwarranted  declarations.  With  one  sweep  of  his 
pen  he  places  the  Church  of  England — which  originated 
with  Henry  VIII, — above  the  apostolic  Church.  Tnadi- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  297 

tion  above  the  written  word,  the  authority  of  councils 
above  the  authority  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  "  the  general 
sentiment  of  Christian  liberty"  above  the  facts  of  the 
New  Testament!  And  thus  these  great  expounders  of 
"Christian  liberty"  become  "blind  leaders  of  the  blind." 
If  questions  of  salvation  and  of  eternal  life  are  to  be 
decided  and  regulated  by  "  the  general  sentiment  of  Chris- 
tian liberty"  then  is  the  Romish  Church  "just  as  good 
as  any  other  Church,"  because,  judging  by  her  numerical 
strength  and  wealth  and  worldly  wisdom,  she  represents 
more  of  the  "general  sentiment  of  Christian  liberty" 
than  any  other  body  of  religious  people. 

Pedobaptists  are  very  much  perplexed  over  the  ques- 
tion of  baptism.  The  difficulty  meets  them  at  every 
turn,  and  will  not  down  at  their  bidding.  Lyman 
Abbott,  editor  of  the  Christian  Union,  a  man  of  rare 
ability,  and  as  free  of  prejudice  as  sectarianism  will 
allow  any  man  to  be,  in  commenting  on  the  recent  acts 
of  the  Baptists  in  convention  at  Saratoga,  and  speaking 
of  Judson's  Burmese  Translation,  says: 

There  is  a  scholarly,  an  acceptable,  an  actually  accepted 
version  of  Scripture  in  the  language  of  the  Burmese. 
This  version  is  without  competition,  present  or  pros- 
pective. It  is  the  Burmese  Bible,  at  least  for  an  indefi- 
nite time  to  come.  The  Burmese  depend  ou  it,  on  it 
alone,  for  their  knowledge  of  the  word  of  God.  Such, 
on  one  side,  is  the  state  of  the  facts.  But  this  Burmese 
version  of  Scripture  renders  the  Greek  word  "  baptize," 
with  its  cognates,  by  a  vernacular  equivalent  moaning 
"immerse."  Xo  competent  scholar  will  assert  that  this 
is  an  unscholarly  rendering  of  the  Greek  original.  This 
rendering,  however,  compels  the  Christian  missionaries 
who  do  not  practice  immersion,  and  who,  of  course,  do 
not  teach  immersion,  to  explain  the  terms  involved. 
There  is  for  such  missionaries  an  obvious  disadvantage 
in  this.  Still,  in  spite  of  the  disadvantage,  missionaries 
not  Baptists  do,  as  matter  of  fact,  use  this  version,  mak- 


298  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

ing  the  necessary  explanation.  Now  the  course  taken 
by  the  American  Bible  Society  is  to  refuse  its  aid  in 
circulating  this  version  of  the  Scriptures,  which  stands 
alone  as  the  one  means  through  which  many  millions  of 
human  beings  may  know  the  word  of  God  and  the  way 
of  salvation.  The  Bible  Society  should  recede  from  this 
refusal.  Now  is  an  opportune  time  for  it  to  correct  its 
mistake.  It  can  well  afford  to  do  so.  Indeed,  it  can 
not  afford  not  to  do  so.  Noblesse  oblige.  Strength, 
wealth,  prestige,  involve  responsibilities,  create  obliga- 
tions. 

If  the  case  were  no  other  than  it  is;  if  it  were  a  ques- 
tion of  antecedent  instruction  to  translators  what  kind 
of  versions  to  produce,  the  case  might  be  different.  We 
might  then  say,  Let  "baptize  "be  transferred — that  is, 
transliterated — into  the  heathen  tongues,  not  translated 
at  all.  Missionaries  of  different  views  on  the  subject  of 
baptism  could  then  use  one  and  the  same  Bible,  apply- 
ing their  several  explanations  of  the  terms  transferred. 
This  is  the  course  pursued  in  both  the  New  and  Old 
Versions  of  the  Bible,  and  it  is  a  wise  one.  But  here  is 
a  version  already  in  existence,  already  in  possession,  ex- 
clusive possession.  It  translates,  indeed,  instead  of 
transliterating;  but  it  translates  truly  enough  so  far  as 
mere  lexicography  goes.  Nobody  can  deny  that,  nobody 
at  least  whose  denial  would  weigh.  Nay,  if  non- 
Baptist  Burmese  scholars  were  to  make  a  new  version 
of  their  own,  and  in  that  version  translate  the  terms  in 
question,  such  scholars  would  not  render  those  terms  in 
a  manner  to  contradict  the.  version  already  existing.  The 
utmost  that  they  could  do  would  be  to  render  those 
terms  by  words  or  phrases  of  a  general  and  indeter- 
minate meaning.  What  would  thus  be  gained?  Why, 
against  a  version  that  gave  what  is  certainly  the  general 
meaning  of  "baptize,"  there  would  be  a  version  that 
did  not  give  the  meaning  of  that  word  at  all.  That  is 
all.  Would  the  gain  be  sufficient  to  warrant  the  Ameri- 
can Bible  Society  in  entering  the  field  with  a  rival 
version?  The  Bible  Society  by  its  inaction  has  already 
answered  that  question.  But  either  do  this  or  do  noth- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  299 

ing  is  the  alternative  to  which  the  American  Bible 
Society  is  shut  up  if  it  refuses  to  help  circulate  Dr. 
Judson's  Burmese  version  of  Scripture.  In  this  existing 
state  of  the  case  what  is  the  duty  of  the  Society  seems 
to  us  very  plain.  The  Society  ought  not  to  produce  a 
rival  version,  and  it  ought  not  to  do  nothing. 

The  record  of  God  stands  fast,  and  the  ordinances  of 
God  stand  fast.  And  men — whether  Papal  or  Protestant 
— can  not  remove  them  nor  nullify  them,  unless  they 
reject  the  word  of  God  and  crush  down  the  Bible.  And 
that  is  just  what  the  so-called  orthodox  churches  are 
doing  and  have  been  doing.  And  what  is  it  done  for, 
except  it  be,  if  possible,  to  popularize  Christianity? 
The  question  still  comes  up,  as  in  the  days  of  the  prophet 
Malachi,  "What  profit  is  there  in  keeping  the  ordinances?" 
And  to  please  the  people,  time-serving  preachers  and 
priests  admit  that  there  is  no  profit  in  thus  serving 
God.  The  " covenant  of  God  is  broken"  and  "the 
ordinance  is  changed"  to  please  a  gainsaying  world; 
and  hence,  instead  of  reforming  the  world  by  teaching 
men  of  the  world  to  fear  God  and  honor  his  holy  law, 
these  miserable  self-seekers  compromise  the  truth  of  God 
and  sell  their  souls  for  a  mess  of  pottage. 

IMMERSION SPRINKLE — POUR.      WHICH  ? 

As  we  are  not  writing  for  Greeks  and  Latins,  but  for 
English  readers — for  the  "common  people" — we  shall 
not  impose  upon  our  readers  by  appealing  to  dead  lan- 
guages of  which  many  of  them  know  comparatively 
nothing,  except  as  we  shall  take  the  benefit  of  the  latest 
versions  of  the  New  Testament,  and  as  we  shall  avail 
ourselves  of  the  benefits  of  some  criticisms  made  by  the 
best  scholars  of  modern  times.  King  James'  Version, 
supplemented  by  the  American  New  Revision,  is  plain 


300  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

enough  for  any  ordinary  man  who  is  not  a  bigoted  secta- 
rian, nor  a  Pharisee  of  the  deepest  dye.  Children  who 
read  the  New  Testament  with  minds  unbiased,  and  illit- 
erate negroes  who  hear  the  New  Testament  read  aloud, 
never  understand  the  word  baptize  as  meaning  either 
sprinkle  or  pour.  The  writer  was  sprinkled  in  infancy, 
and  brought  up  in  the  Lutheran  faith,  and  yet,  during 
all  this  time,  when  reading  the  New  Testament,  he  al- 
ways believed  in  immersion  as  it  reads  in  the  apostolic 
commission  and  in  parallel  passages.  It  is  our  firm  con- 
viction that  any  rational  man  who  reads  the  plain  state- 
ments of  Scripture,  and  then  rejects  immersion  and  sub- 
stitutes sprinkle  or  pour,  is  morally  dishonest,  or  does 
not  believe  the  word  of  God  as  an  inspired  revelation. 
Let  us  recite  a  few  passages. 

"In  those  days  came  John  the  Baptist,  preaching  in 
the  wilderness  of  Judea."  (Alatt.  iii.  1.)  Baptistccs  is 
the  Greek  of  Baptist,  and  means  "he  who  immerses." 
The  passage  never  has,  in  any  language,  been  translated 
either  sprinkle  or  pour. 

"Then  went  out  to  him  Jerusalem  and  all  Judea,  and 
all  the  region  round  about  Jordan,  and  were  baptized 
of  him  in  Jordan,  confessing  their  sins."  (Matt.  iii.  5, 
6.)  If  in  the  phrases,  fi in  Jordan" — "in  the  river  Jor- 
dan"— any  one  can,  by  stretch  of  the  imagination,  dis- 
cover the"  idea  of  sprinkle,  he  is  certainly  beyond  the 
pale  of  reason. 

"I  indeed  baptize  you  with  water  (en  hudati — in  water), 
but  he  shall  baptize  you  with  the  Holy  Spirit"  (en  pneu 
mati  hagio — in  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  actually  took  place 
on  the  day  of  Pentecost).  (Mark  i.  8.)  The  same  Greek 
preposition  is  found  in  these  passages:  "In  the  wilder- 
ness— "in  Jordan" — "in  Bethlehem,"  and  in  very  many 
other  similar  phrases  in  the  New  Testament.  The  Amer- 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  301 

lean  New  Revision  renders  the  passage  just  quoted,  "m 
water,"  and  "w  the  Holy  Spirit;"  and  the  English 
(Canterbury)  Revision  gives  it  that  meaning  in  the  mar- 
gin of  their  work — a  fact  that  forever  annihilates  all  the 
petty  quibbles  of  pedobaptists.  The  American  revisers 
translate  Matt.  iii.  11,  as  follows: 

"I  indeed  baptize  you  in  water  unto  repentance:  but 
he  that  cometh  after  me  is  mightier  than  I,  whose  shoos 
I  am  not  worthy  to  bear:  he  shall  baptize  you  in  the 
Holy  Spirit  and  in  lire."  Let  it  be  distinctly  noted  that 
the  American  Revision  is  a  pedobaptist  work.  This 
verse  has  been  the  puzzle,  and  the  hiding-place,  and  the 
bamboozle  of  pedobaptists  for  the  last  fifty  years.  So 
far  as  this  verse  is  concerned,  their  occupation  is  now 
gone.  The  great  Lutheran  commentator,  Lange,  a  man 
of  acknowledged  scholarship,  translates  Matt.  iii.  11 
thus:  "I  indeed  baptize  you  in  (en)  water,  immersing 
you  in  the  element  of  water,  unto  repentance."  Let  it 
be  understood  that  baptism  is  not  water,  but  that  it  is  an 
act  of  faith — an  act  of  obedience — whether  the  act  takes 
place  in  water,  or  in  some  other  fluid.  Christ  command- 
ed the  act  to  be  done  in  water.  Let  us  follow  the  rec- 
ord. 

"And  it  came  to  pass  in  those  days  that  Jesus  came 
.  .  .  and  was  baptized  of  John  in  Jordan,  and  straight- 
way coming  up  out  of  the  water,  he  saw  the  heavens  open- 
ed." (Mark  i.  9,10.)  How  men  can  predicate  sprinkle 
of  such  phrases  as  "in  water" — "in  Jordan" — "up  out 
of  the  water,"  is  a  problem  in  ethics  never  understood 
by  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament.  Such  casuistry 
is  worthy  of  the  age  of  the  mystics. 

"And  John  also  was  baptizing  in  ./Enon,  near  Salim, 
because  there  was  much  water  there:  and  they  came  and 
were  baptized."  (John  iii.  23.)  John  went  where  there 


302  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

was  much  water,  or  many  streams,  for  the  specific  pur- 
pose of  immersing  the  people,  and  not  to  water  camels, 
and  to  assuage  the  thirst  of  the  multitude.  Neither  the 
word  "baptized"  nor  the  circumstances  denote  or  call 
to  mind  the  idea  of  sprinkle  or  pour.  These  last  two 
words  are  not  in  the  premises. 

"And  as  they  went  on  their  way,  they  came  unto  a 
certain  water,  .  .  .  and  they  went  down  both  into 
the  water,  both  Philip  and  the  eunuch;  and  he  baptized 
him."  (Acts  viii.  36-38.)  It  will  be  noted  that  the 
parties  first  came  to  the  water,  then  they  went  down  into 
the  water,  and,  having  gone  down  into  the  water,  then 
Philip  immersed  the  eunuch.  The  idea  of  corning  to 
the  water,  and  then  descending  into  the  water,  in  order 
to  sprinkle  water  upon  the  eunuch,  is  simply  absurd  as 
well  as  ludicrous.  "A  certain  water,"  means  one  among 
a  number  of  streams.  By  reference  to  Colman's  "  Map 
of  the  Holy  Land"  (a  Presbyterian  production),  it  will 
be  seen  that  several  rivers,  emptying  into  the  Mediter- 
ranean Sea,  have  their  course  in  this  part  of  the  coun- 
try. Now  let  us  turn  to  the  Epistles,  and  note  how  the 
allusions  to  baptism  in  them  correspond  with  the  prac- 
tice of  John,  Christ  and  the  apostles. 

"Or  are  ye  ignorant  that  all  who  were  baptized  into 
Christ  Jesus  were  baptized  into  his  death?  We  are 
buried,  therefore,  with  him  through  baptism  into  death : 
that  like  as  Christ  was  raised  from  the  dead  through 
the  glory  of  the  Father,  so  we  also  might  walk  in  new- 
ness of  life."  (Rom.  vi.  3,  4.) 

"Having  been  buried  with  him  in  baptism,  wherein 
ye  were  also  raised  with  him  through  faith  in  the  work- 
ing of  God,  who  raised  him  from  the  dead."  (Col.  ii. 
12.)  We  have  quoted  from  the  American  Revised  Ver- 
sion. In  all  our  researches  we  have  never  found  one 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  £03 

man  of  distinction  who  has  denied  that  "buried"  in 
both  these  passages  refers  to  the  ordinance  of  immer- 
sion, as  practiced  in  the  apostolic  age;  but,  on  the  other 
hand,  it  is  an  indisputable  fact  that  all  lexicographers, 
commentators,  reformers,  historians,  annotators  and  an- 
tiquarians affirm  that  these  passages  refer  to  immersion. 
Conybeare  and  Howson,  both  eminent  critics  in  the 
Church  of  England,  in  the  work  entitled  the  Life  and 
Epistles  of  Paul,  translate  thus:  "With  him,  therefore, 
we  were  buried  by  baptism,  wherein  we  shared  his  death 
when  we  sank  beneath  the  waters."  To  which  this  foot- 
note is  appended:  "This  clause,  which  is  here  left  ellip- 
tical, is  fully  expressed  in  Col.  ii.  12.  This  passage  can  not 
be  understood  unless  it  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  primi- 
tive baptism  was  by  immersion."  (Life  and  Epistles  of 
Paul,  Vol.  II.,  p.  169.)  These  same  distinguished  biblical 
scholars  thus  again  speak  of  baptism: 

It  is  needless  to  add  that  baptism  was  (unless  in  ex- 
ceptional cases)  administered  by  immersion,  the  convert 
being  plunged  beneath  the  surface  of  the  wr.ter  to  repre- 
sent his  death  to  the  life  of  sin,  and  then  raised  from 
this  momentary  burial  to  represent  his  resurrection  to 
the  life  of  righteousness.  It  must  be  a  subject  of  regret 
that  the  general  discontinuance  of  this  original  form  of 
baptism  (though  perhaps  necessary  in  our  northern  cli- 
mates) has  rendered  obscure  to  popular  apprehensions 
some  very  important  passages  of  Scripture.  (Vol.  I., 
p.  439. ) 

Speaking  of  the  conversion  of  Lydia,  these  authors 
say: 

Lydia,  being  convinced  that  Jesus  was  the  Messiah, 
and  having  made  a  profession  of  her  faith,  was  forthwith 
baptized.  The  place  of  her  baptism  was  doubtless  the 
stream  which  flowed  by  the  proscuchn.  The  waters  of 
Europe  were  "sanctified  to  the  mystical  washing  away 
of  sin."  With  the  baptism  of  Lydia  that  of  her  ''house- 
25 


304  GOSP1L    PRINCIPLES. 

hold"  was  associated.  Whether  we  arc  to  understand 
by  this  term  her  children,  her  slaves,  or  the  work-people 
engaged  in  the  manual  employment  connected  with  her 
trade,  can  not  easily  be  decided.  (Life  and  Epistles  of 
Paul,  Vol.  I.,  p.  296.) 

In  a  foot-note  they  remark  as  follows  :  "  Meyer  thinks 
they  were  female  assistants  in  the  business  connected 
with  her  trade.  It  is  well  known  that  this  is  one  of  the 
passages  often  adduced  in  the  controversy  concerning 
infant  baptism.  We  need  not  urge  this  view  of  it;  for 
belief  that  infant  baptism  is  l  most  agreeable  with  the 
institution  of  Christ'  does  not  rest  on  this  text."  Italics 
ours. 

Though  these  men,  as  the  exponents  of  orthodoxy, 
and  as  prominent  ecclesiastics  in  the  Church  of  England, 
show  amazing  inconsistency  by  practicing  what  is  not 
sustained  by  the  word  of  God,  and  by  practicing  in  the 
Church  of  England  what  was  never  practiced  in  the 
apostolic  church;  yet  their  testimony  in  regard  to  the 
literature  of  the  New  Testament,  and  their  critical 
knowledge  of  the  ancient  languages,  outweigh,  in  the 
court  of  public  investigation,  the  smatterings  and  quib- 
bles and  cavilings  of  all  the  little  sectarian  pettifoggers 
of  all  the  orthodox  churches.  Below^  we  present  the 
testimonies  of  some  of  the  most  celebrated  church  his- 
torians. 

Moshiem,  EC.  Hist.  1-87,  says: 

In  this  (the  first)  century  baptism  was  administered  in 
convenient  places,  without  the  public  assemblies,  and  by 
immersing  the  candidate  wholly  in  water. 

In  Stanley's  History  of  the  Eastern  Church  we  have 
this  language: 

There  can  be  no  question  that  the  original  form  of 
baptism — the  very  meaning  of  the  word — was  complete 
immersion  in  the  deep  baptismal  waters;  and  that,  for 


REFORMATORY   MOVEMENTS.  305 

at  least  four  centuries,  any  other  form  was  either  un- 
known, or  regarded,  unless  in  the  case  of  dangerous  ill- 
ness, as  an  exceptional,  almost  a  monstrous  case.  To 
this  form  the  Eastern  Church  still  rigidly  adheres. 

Philip  Schaff,  in  his  History  of  the  Apostolic  Church, 
says: 

indeed,  some  would  not  allow  even  this  baptismus 
clinicorum  (baptism  of  the  sick),  as  it  was  called,  to  be 
valid  baptism,  and  Cyprian  himself,  in  the  third  century, 
ventured  to  defend  the  aspersio  only  in  case  of  a  neccs- 
sitas  cogens,  and  with  reference  to  a  special  indulgentia 
Dei  (ep.  76  Magna).  There  were  ecclesiastical  laws 
which  made  persons  baptized  by  sprinkling  ineligible  to 
church  offices.  .  .  .  Not  till  the  end  of  the  thirteenth 
century  did  sprinkling  become  the  rule  and  immersion 
the  exception. 

In  the  American  Cyclopedia  we  have  these  words: 

The  form  of  baptism  at  first  was,  according  to  most 
historians,  by  immersion ;  but  as  Christianity  advanced 
into  colder  climates,  the  more  convenient  mode  of  sprink- 
ling was  introduced. 

All  these  are  pedobaptists.  Mosheim  was  a  member 
of  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Church;  Dean  Stanley 
was  a  member  of  the  Church  of  England,  and  Schaft'  is 
a  member  of  the  Reformed  (German)  Church.  But, 
like  the  Pope  of  Rome,  the  little  Popes  of  the  Protestant 
Church  have  assumed  to  "change"  the-  ordinance  of 
Jesus  Christ.  For  instance,  the  following  from  John 
Calvin : 

But  whether  the  person  who  is  baptized  be  wholly 
immersed,  and  whether  thrice  or  once,  or  whether  water 
be  only  poured  or  sprinkled  upon  him,  is  of  no  import- 
ance. Churches  ought  to  be  left  at  liberty,  in  this  re- 
spect, to  act  according  to  the  difference  of  countries.  The 
very  word  baptize,  however,  signifies  to  immerse;  and  it 
is  certain  that  immersion  was:  the  practice  of  the  ancient 
Church.  (Christian  Institute,  Chap.  XV.) 


306  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

And  this  from  Luther: 

First,  the  name  baptism  is  Greek;  in  Latin  it  can  be 
rendered  immersion,  when  we  immerse  anything  into 
water,  that  it  may  be  all  covered  with  water.  And  al- 
though that  custom  has  now  grown  out  of  use  with  most 
persons  (nor  do  they  wholly  submerge  children,  but  only 
pour  on  a  little  water),  yet  they  ought  to  be  entirely 
immersed  and  immediately  drawn  out.  For  this  the 
etymology  of  the  word  seems  to  demand.  (Luther  on 
the  Sacrament  of  Baptism.') 

In  the  Douay  Bible  (Romish  translation),  which  con- 
tains Haddock's  !N"otes,  and  especially  approved  by  Pope 
Pius  IX.,  with  tbe  sanction  of  many  archbishops,  we 
find  the  following  confession: 

Baptized. — The  word  baptism  signifies  a  washing,  par- 
ticularly when  it  is  done  by  immersion  or  by  dipping  or 
plunging  a  thing  under  water,  which  was  formerly  the 
ordinary  wray  of  administering  the  sacrament  of  baptism. 
But  the  Church,  which  can  not  change  the  least  article 
of  the  Christian  faith,  is  not  tied  up  in  matters  of  disci- 
pline and  ceremonies.  Not  only  the  Catholic  Church,  but 
also  the  pretended  Reformed  Churches  have  altered  this 
primitive  custom  in  giving  the  sacrament  of  baptism,  and 
now  allow  of  baptism  by  pouring  or  sprinkling  water 
upon  the  person  baptized. 

With  such  authorities  as  these,  what  further  need 
have  we  of  testimony?  The  practical  question  still  re- 
mains: Shall  we  honor  an  institution  of  Jesus  the  Christ, 
which,  besides  the  testimonies  of  the  Scriptures,  has  the 
unequivocal  approval  of  all  scholars  and  all  eminent 
men,  or  shall  we  practice  a  thing  that  rests  entirely  upon 
tradition  and  assumption? 

THE  HOLY  SPIRIT. 

God  made  promise  in  the  gospel  that  the  Holy  Spirit 
should  remain  in  the  Church  of  Christ  forever.  The 
Spirit  of  God  comes  to  the  world  and  to  the  Church  as  a 


REFORMATORY   MOVEMENTS.  807 

promise,  not  as  a  command,  and  not  in  answer  to  prayer. 
What  God  promises,  he  fulfills.  When  religious  zealots 
pray  God,  and  sometimes  even  command  him,  "to  send 
down  the  Holy  Spirit,"  they  perform  a  thing  that  has 
no  warrant  in  the  Word  of  God.  It  looks  like  great  ir- 
reverence, and  betrays  a  wonderful  ignorance  of  the 
mind  of  the  Scriptures,  to  see  men  asking  God  to  "  send 
down  "  the  Holy  Spirit  periodically,  or  as  occasion  may 
demand,  or  when  sensational  preachers  are  in  a  humor 
to  get  up  a  "big  meeting,"  when,  at  .the  same  time,  the 
Spirit  of  God  is  ever  present  in  his  Church.  When  we 
read,  "The  Spirit  and  the  Bride  say,  Come,"  is  riot  that 
always  in  the  present  tense — ever  present  and  never  ab- 
sent? When  Christ  said  to  his  disciples  that  the  Father 
would  send  them  another  Comforter  (John  xiv.  16),  even 
the  Spirit  of  truth,  that  he  might  abide  with  them  and 
with  the  disciples  of  Christ  forever,  why  irreverently  and 
stupidly  pray  for  that  which  we  already  possess?  The 
Holy  Spirit  is  ever  present  with  the  Word,  as  God  and 
Christ  are  ever  present  in  the  Word.  Some  preachers 
act  as  though  the  Spirit  of  God,  the  greater  part  of  the 
time,  was  roaming  in  infinite  space,  and  that  the  Spirit 
made  periodical  visits  to  the  earth,  whenever  some  fanatic 
proposed  to  besiege  the  dominions  of  darkness. 

God,  in  the  beginning,  revealed  truth;  Christ,  as  the 
Son  of  God,  revealed  the  truth;  the  Holy  Spirit  con- 
firmed the  truth  revealed;  and  these  three  agree  in  one 
— agree  in  character,  agree  in  purpose,  agree  in  action. 
God  reveals  law;  Christ  executes  the  law;  the  Holy 
Spirit  confirms  and  gives  finality  to  the  law.  In  this, 
we  have  the  legislative,  the  executive  and  the  judicial. 
The  apostles  did  not  preach  the  Holy  Spirit,  but  they 
preached  as  the  Spirit  gave  them  utterance — preached 
"Christ  and  him  crucified,"  infallibly  guided  by  the 


308  GOSPEL   PRINCIPLES. 

Spirit.  It  is  not  the  mechanical  operations  of  the  Spirit 
that  change  the  moral  nature  of  man,  but  it  is  the  truth, 
as  revealed  by  the  Spirit — the  truth  being  brought  in 
contact  with  the  mind  and  conscience  of  the  sinner. 
"We  do  not  intend  to  discuss  the  possibilities  and  limit- 
ations of  the  Holy  Spirit,  but  simply  the  sublime  truths 
revealed  by  the  Spirit.  "What  the  Spirit  of  God  has 
power  to  do  in  the  vast  universe,  above  and  beyond  the 
revealed  truth,  we  know  not,  nor  is  it  our  business  to 
pry  into  the  mysteries  of  the  great  Creator;  but  it  is 
our  privilege  to  harmonize  and  preach  the  truth  which 
the  Spirit  has  revealed.  We  shall  scripturally  analyze 
the  following  propositions: 

(a)  The  baptism  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

(6)  The  impartation  of  the  Holy  Spirit  by  the  impo- 
sition of  apostolic  hands. 

(<:•)  The  gospel  or  the  word  as  revealed  by  the  Spirit. 

(d)  The  confirmation  of  the  word  by  attestations  of 
miraculous  power. 

(e)  The  relation  of  the  Spirit  to  the  sinner. 

(/)  The  relation  of  the  Spirit  to  the  child  of  God. 

(g)  The  gift  of  the  Spirit. 

(A)  Who  quench  the  Spirit? 

(i)  Resisting  the  Spirit. 

(j)  The  witness  of  the  Spirit. 

(k)  The  fruits  of  the  Spirit. 

(I)  Personality  of  the  Spirit. 

There  are  only  two  cases  on  record  of  a  visible  bap- 
tism in  the  Holy  Spirit,  viz:  the  one  which  occurred  on 
the  day  of  Pentecost,  when  the  gospel,  in  fact,  for  the 
first  time  was  offered  to  the  Jews,  in  the  name  of  our 
risen  Lord;  and  the  one  which  took  place  in  the  house 
of  Cornelius,  at  Cresarea,  when,  for  the  first  time,  the 
gospel,  in  fact,  was  proclaimed  to  the  Gentile  world  by 


REFORMATORY   MOVEMENTS.  309 

the  apostle  Peter,  who,  with  the  "keys  of  the  kingdom" 
of  God  as  the  first  of  the  apostles  in  authority,  but  not 
above  the  other  apostles  in  authority,  opened  the  king- 
dom to  both  Jew  and  Gentile.  (Acts,  chapters  ii.  and  x.) 
In  both  these  places  the  gospel  was  introduced  by  visible 
miraculous  manifestations,  in  harmony  with  the  fact  that 
in  the  inauguration  of  any  new  order  of  things,  whether 
physical  or  religious,  the  Almighty  made  use  of  extra- 
ordinary power;  but  that,  after  the  inauguration  of  the 
special  order,  by  supernatural  power,  the  Lord  subse- 
quently employed  ordinary  means  in  the  accomplish- 
ment of  his  will.  Spiritual  creation  is  analogous  to 
physical  creation.  In  the  physical  creation,  God  created 
the  first  man  a  perfect  man  in  stature,  and  not  a  babe 
in  stature.  Subsequent  to  that,  every  human  being, 
including  the  Sou  of  Mary,  came  up  from  babyhood, 
according  to  the  laws  of  procreation.  The  first  animal 
of  every  species,  and  the  first  bird  of  every  species,  and 
the  first  fish  of  every  species,  and  the  first  flower  of  every 
species,  was  each  made  perfect  according  to  its  nature. 
After  that,  everything  in  the  physical  world  must  be 
reproduced  through  the  medium  of  the  seminal  princi- 
ple. The  giving  of  the  Ten  Commandments  on  Mount 
Sinai  by  Moses,  was  through  the  interposition  of  a  mir- 
acle. After  this  revelation,  the  Jewish  people,  in  their 
religious  worship  and  moral  conduct,  were  to  be  edu- 
cated and  regulated  by  the  precepts  and  principles  which 
the  constitution  of  the  Jewish  theocracy  contained. 
Analogous  to  this  was  the  Gospel  Dispensation.  To 
miraculously  reveal  the  gospel  was  one  thing;  to  induce 
the  human  family  to  live  by  its  spiritual  precepts  and 
its  moral  power,  is  another  thing.  The  law  of  Moses 
miraculously  came  down  from  Mount  Sinai;  "the  law 
of  the  Spirit  of  life  in  Christ  Jesus,  which  makes  us 


310  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

free  from  the  law  of  sin  and  death,"  came  down  mirac- 
ulously from  Mount  Zion. 

Certain  results  followed  the  baptism  of  the  Spirit 
in  the  two  cases  mentioned:  1.  A  sound  came  from 
heaven  like  the  rushing  of  a  mighty  wind.  2.  What- 
ever that  sound  was,  or  the  particular  thing  that  pro- 
duced the  sound,  it  filled  the  room  where  the  apostles 
were  waiting  the  fulfillment  of  the  promise  of  the  Father. 

3.  Cloven  or  parted  tongues,  resembling  fire,  rested  upon 
the  heads  of  the  apostles,  symbolic  of  the  fact  that  God 
intended  to  make  use  of  human  tongues  in  the  dissem- 
ination of  the  glad  tidings  of  salvation.     Paul  says  (2 
Cor.  iv.  7):  "We  have  this  treasure  [the  preaching  of 
the  gospel]  in  earthen  vessels,  that  the  excellency  of  the 
power  maybe  of  God,  and  not  of  us" — the  apostles. 

4.  The  apostles  were  empowered  by  the  guidance  of  the 
Spirit  to  speak  in  every  tongue  of  the  wonderful  works 
of  God. 

On  the  self-evident  principle  that  like  causes,  under 
like  circumstances,  produce  like  effects,  we  have  this  to 
say,  that  if  any  one  in  these  modern  times  pretends  to 
have  been  immersed  in  the  Holy  Spirit  as  were  the  apos- 
tles of  Jesus  Christ,  he  must  produce  the  same  creden- 
tials as  those  which  appertained  to  the  apostles.  He 
must  give  assurance  that  at  the  time  of  his  immersion 
in  the  Holy  Spirit,  there  was  (1)  heard  the  rushing  of  a 
mighty  wind  coming  down  out  of  heaven ;  (2)  that  parted 
tongues  as  of  fire  stood  upon  his  head;  (3)  that  the  house 
was  filled  with  an  unearthly  sound,  and  (4)  that  he  can 
speak  in  every  man's  tongue  the  gospel  of  Christ,  with- 
out having  learned  the  languages  of  all  the  tribes  of  the 
earth.  Unless  he  can  present  such  credentials  as  these, 
he  is  self-deceived  as  well  as  a  deceiver  of  others. 

The  strange  phenomenon  which  on  the  day  of  Peute- 


REFORMATORY   MOVEMENTS.  oil 

cost  and  in  the  house  of  Cornelius -resembled  fire,  was 
but  a  manifestation  of  the  presence  of  God;  as  was  the 
fire  that  came  down  from  heaven  and  licked  up  the  first 
sacrifice  upon  the  first  altar  reared  by  the  command  of 
Jehovah ;  as  was  the  flaming  sword  placed  at  the  en- 
trance of  the  garden  of  Eden  after  the  expulsion  of 
Adam  and  Eve;  as  was  the  burning  bush  as  seen  by 
Moses  in  the  land  of  Midian;  as  was  also  the  shekinah 
in  the  most  holy  place  of  the  tabernacle  and  temple 
worship  of  the  Jews.  When  preachers,  ignorant  of  the 
word  of  God — and  sometimes  willfully  ignorant — call 
upon  God  to  baptize  the  people  "with  the  Holy  Ghost 
and  with  ftre,"  they  do  not  seem  to  be  aware  of  the 
fact  that,  since  the  organization  of  human  society,  and 
through  all  the  generations  of  men,  God  has  used  fire 
as  a  symbol  of  his  vengeance  upon  wicked  nations,  upon 
wicked  families,  and  upon  wicked  individuals.  When 
John  the  Baptist  spoke  of  baptism  in  the  Holy  Spirit 
and  in  fire,  he  was  addressing  two  distinct  classes  of  men 
— the  believing  and  the  unbelieving,  the  righteous  and 
the  unrighteous.  (Matt.  iii.  11.)  This  statement  is 
made  clear  by  the  fact  that  when  Christ  told  his  apos- 
tles that  they  "should  be  baptized  in  the  Holy  Spirit 
not  many  days  hence,"  he  said  nothing  about  a  "baptism 
in  fire,"  for  the  reason  that  he  was  addressing  only  be- 
lievers, and  not  unbelievers,  as  in  the  case  of  John,  who 
had  both  classes  before  him.  (See  Acts  i.  5.) 

The  apostles  received  the  miraculous  endowment  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  as  the  fulfillment  of  a  special  promise 
made  by  the  Savior  to  them,  but  to  no  one  else.  Joel, 
the  prophet,  as  well  as  John  the  Baptist,  in  general  terms 
and  in  a  certain  sense,  spoke  of  all  nations  as  coming 
under  the  influence  of  the  Spirit,  just  as,  in  a  general 
sense,  all  families  were  to  be  blessed  in  Christ,  or  by  the 


312  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

gracious  influences  of  his  gospel,  according  to  the  prom- 
ise which  God  made  to  Abraham,  or  as  quoted  by  Paul 
iu  these  words  (Gal.  iii.  8) :  "And  the  Scripture,  fore- 
seeing that  God  would  justify  the  heathen  through  faith, 
preached  before  the  gospel  to  Abraham,  saying:  In  thee 
shall  all  nations  be  blessed."  But  after  Christ  selects 
his  apostles  and  educates  them,  and  in  anticipation  of 
fitting  them  to  carry  out  the  great  commission,  he  tells 
them,  in  specific  terms,  that  they,  as  his  accredited  wit- 
nesses and  embassadors,  shall  "receive  the  promise  of 
the  Father,"  and  be  endowed  "with  power  from  above." 
This  promise  Christ  never  made  to  the  promiscuous 
multitude.  There  must  be  a  limit  somewhere,  and 
Christ  himself  defines  the  limit:  because  if  we  embrace 
all  mankind  under  the  term  "all  flesh,"  as  becoming 
recipients  of  the  baptism  of  the  Spirit,  the  proposition 
would  include  all  sorts  of  men — believers,  infidels  and 
scoffers,  and  therefore,  in  proving  too  much,  it  would 
prove  nothing. 

THE  BAPTISM  IN  THE  SPIRIT. 

It  is  one  of  the  distinct  offices  of  the  Spirit  to  reveal 
the  truth — not  ordinary  truth,  which  belongs  to  matter 
and  force,  but  spiritual  truth,  which  is  born  in  heaven. 
In  the  city  of  Jerusalem,  on  the  eventful  day  of  Pente- 
cost, when  it  was  noised  abroad  that  the  apostles  were 
speaking,  in  every  man's  tongue,  the  wronderful  works 
of  God,  "as  the  Spirit  gave  them  utterance,"  then  "the 
multitude  came  together,"  and  the  multitude  were  "  trou- 
bled in  mind,  because  that  every  man  had  heard  them 
speak  in  his  own  language."  Here  it  is  plainly  seen 
that  the  multitude  were  not  present  to  receive  the  en- 
dowment of  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  the  apostles  received  it. 
Christ  never  promised  to  immerse  the  "  multitude  "  in 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  313 

the  Holy  Spirit,  neither  on  the  day  of  Pentecost  nor  on 
any  subsequent  period. 

Christ,  in  his  special  charge  to  his  apostles,  says: 
"Nevertheless,  I  tell  you  the  truth.  It  is  expedient  for 
you  that  I  go  away:  for  if  I  go  not  away,  the  Comforter 
will  not  come  to  you;  but  if  I  depart,  I  will  send  him  to 
you.  And  when  he  [not  if]  is  come,  he  will  convince 
the  world  of  sin,  and  of  righteousness,  and  of  judgment'' 
— not  convince  the  world  by  a  direct  agency,  but  through 
the  medium  of  the  apostles.  (John  xvi.  7,  8.)  On  the 
day  of  Pentecost,  after  "the  multitude  came  together," 
the  apostle  Peter,  standing  up  with  the  eleven,  and 
speaking  as  the  Spirit  gave  him  utterance,  without  any 
thought  upon  his  part,  preached  the  good  news  of  sal- 
vation to  the  assembled  people,  who,  after  being  pierced 
to  the  heart  by  the  words  of  truth  uttered,  cried  out  in 
great  distress  of  mind,  "  Men  and  brethren,  what  must 
we  do?"  The  answer  to  this  will  be  given  in  another 
place. 

We  now  come  to  the  second  case  of  the  immersion  in 
the  Holy  Spirit,  that  of  the  household  of  Cornelius,  as 
recorded  in  the  tenth  and  eleventh  chapters  of  Acts  of 
Apostles.  Peter,  in  referring  to  the  case  of  Cornelius 
and  his  house,  after  the  immersion  in  the  Spirit  had 
taken  place,  in  his  rehearsal  of  the  great  event  before 
his  Jewish  brethren,  said:  "And  as  I  began  to  speak 
[began  to  preach  the  gospel],  the  Holy  Spirit  fell  on 
them,  as  on  us  at  the  beginning.  Then  remembered  I 
the  word  of  the  Lord,  how  that  he  said,  John  indeed 
baptized  in  [eri]  water,  but  you  shall  be  baptized  in  [en\ 
the  Holy  Spirit."  The  word  of  the  Lord,  under  the 
reign  of  Christ,  and  therefore  under  the  New  Covenant, 
was  first  to  be  proclaimed  in  Jerusalem,  as  the  beginning 
place.  (See  Isaiah  ii.  and  Luke  xxiv.)  The  Jewish 


31-1  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

brethren,  who  accompanied  Peter  to  Cseserea  as  wit- 
nesses, "were  astonished,  because  that  on  the  Gentiles 
also  was  poured  out  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  For 
they  heard  them  [the  first  Gentile  converts]  speak  with 
tongues  and  magnify  God" — as  the  direct  effect  of  this 
remarkable  endowment.  Peter,  in  his  apology  before 
his  Jewish  brethren,  says:  "Forasmuch  then,  as  God 
gave  them  the  like  gift  as  he  did  unto  us  [apostles],  who 
believed  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ;  what  was  I,  that  I 
could  withstand  God?"  In  those  days  of  miracles,  we 
must  be  careful  to  discriminate  between  the  recipient  of 
miraculous  power  and  the  recipient  of  the  remission  of 
sins  through  obedience  to  the  gospel;  for,  in  the  case 
before  us,  we  see  that  after  the  Holy  Spirit  "fell  on  all 
them  who  heard  the  word,"  Peter  said,  "  Can  any  man 
forbid  water,  that  these  should  not  be  baptized,  who  have 
received  the  Holy  Spirit  as  well  as  we? "  God  evidently 
intended  by  this  special  miracle  to  convince  the  Jews 
that  the  "middle  wall  of  partition"  between  Jews  and 
Gentiles  was  now  to  be  broken  down,  and  that  the  boon 
of  salvation  through  the  gospel  was  also  to  be  granted 
to  the  Gentiles. 

From  these  facts,  as  well  as  from  collateral  testimony 
we  learn  that  the  purpose  of  the  immersion  of  certain 
characters  in  the  Holy  Spirit  was  not  to  change  the 
moral  nature  of  those  persons,  but  that,  as  expressed  in 
the  language  of  Paul,  tongues  (the  miraculous  use  of 
language)  are  for  a  sign,  not  to  them  that  believe,  but  to 
them  who  believe  not.  (1  Cor.  xiv.  22.)  But  "the 
gospel,"  as  revealed  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  "is  the  power 
of  God  unto  salvation  to  them  who  believe"  and  obey. 
(Rom.  i.  16.)  God  performed  many  miracles  in  the 
presence  of  Pharaoh,  to  give  that  hard  and  inexorable 
despot  to  understand  that  the  Lord,  by  whom  Moses 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  315 

was  sent,  was  the  Jehovah — the  I  Am  that  I  Am — of  the 
Israelites.  Aaron's  rod,  metamorphosed  into  a  serpent, 
swallowed  up  the  rods  of  the  Egyptian  magicians,  whose 
rods  of  divination  also  became  serpents.  But  in  that 
miraculous  display  of  power  there  was  nothing  to  change 
the  moral  character  of  the  witnesses.  The  inspiration 
of  the  dumb  beast  on  which  Balaam,  the  heathen  prophet, 
rode,  and  which  brute  beast  rebuked  the  false  prophet, 
did  not  affect  the  moral  condition  of  that  distinguished 
animal.  Nor,  so  far  as  the  facts  are  revealed  to  us,  was 
the  moral  character  of  the  prophet  himself  changed, 
who,  mechanically  guided  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  pro- 
nounced the  richest  of  blessings  upon  the  Israelites. 
The  Corinthian  Church  possessed  more  gifts  of  working 
miracles  than  any  church  mentioned  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, and  yet  this  church,  above  all  the  churches  founded 
by  the  apostles,  was  the  proudest  and  most  corrupt,  and 
one  which  was  full  of  disorder  and  discontent,  and 
against  which  Paul  files  no  less  than  six  distinct  charges 
of  immorality — all  of  which  forcible  facts  go  to  show 
that  inspiration  does  not  by  itself,  as  a  mechanical 
agency  of  God,  change  the  moral  nature  of  man,  nor 
the  will-power  of  man.  The  Lord,  as  it  were,  dipped 
the  apostles  in  a  flood  of  inspiration,  as  men  dip  pens  in 
ink,  that  by  them,  as  pens  in  his  hand,  he  might  write 
upon  the  "fleshy  tablets  of  the  heart"  "the  law  of  the 
Spirit  of  life  in  Christ  Jesus."  Paul  writes  to  the 
Corinthians:  "Ye  are  our  epistle  written  in  our  hearts, 
known  and  read  of  all  men;  forasmuch  as  you  are 
manifestly  declared  to  be  the  epistles  of  Christ  ministered 
by  us,  written  not  with  ink,  but  with  the  Spirit  of  the 
living  God;  not  in  tables  of  stone,  but  in  fleshy  tables 
of  the  heart."  (2  Cor.  iii.  3;  Rom.  viii.  2.)  Here, 
figuratively,  we  have  the  pen,  the  ink  and  the  written 


316  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

words:  and  the  written  or  revealed  words  contain  or 
convey  the  glad  tidings  of  salvation. 

IMPARTATION  OF  THE  HOLY  SPIRIT  BY  APOSTOLIC  HANDS. 

After  his  resurrection,  and  just  before  his  ascension, 
Christ  thus  addressed  the  apostles:  "But  wait  [at  Jeru- 
salem] for  the  promise  of  the  Father,  which,"  said  he, 
"you  have  heard  of  me.  For  John  truly  baptized  in 
water,  but  you  shall  be  baptized  in  the  Holy  Spirit  not 
many  days  hence."  (Acts  i.  4,  5.) 

After  rebuking  some  of  the  apostles  for  their  unbelief, 
because  they  refused  to  believe  that  he  had  risen  from 
the  dead,  thus  Christ  addresses  them  in  connection  with 
the  Great  Commission:  "And  these  signs  shall  follow 
them  that  believe — In  my  name  they  shall  cast  out 
demons,  they  shall  speak  with  new  tongues,  they  shall 
take  up  serpents,  and  if  they  drink  any  deadly  thing  it 
shall  not  hurt  them;  they  shall  lay  hands  on  the  sick, 
and  they  shall  recover."  (Mark  xvi.  17,  18.) 

The  subsequent  history  of  the  apostles  shows  con- 
clusively that  all  these  instructions  of  the  Savior  had 
direct  reference  to  the  miracles  that  should  be  wrought 
by  the  apostles  and  by  those  persons  upon  whom  they 
should  lay  apostolic  hands.  Of  course  the  apostles 
could  lay  hands  upon  a  third  party  and  the  third  party 
could  perform  miracles,  as  in  the  Corinthian  Church; 
but  it  stands  nowhere  recorded  that  the  power  of  work- 
ing miracles  ever  transcended  the  third  party;  so  that 
when  the  apostles  left  the  stage  of  action,  all  this  ex- 
traordinary power  ceased  entirely.  Paul  explicitly  told 
the  church  at  Corinth  that  prophecies  should  cease,  and 
that  speaking  in  other  tongues  and  interpreting  myster- 
ies should  vanish  away;  but,  said  he,  "I  show  you  a 
more  excellent  ivay"  than  working  miracles;  and  that 


REFORMATORY   MOVEMENTS.  317 

way  is  "faith  that  works  by  love."     (See  1  Cor.  chapters 
xii.  and  xiii.) 

The  imposition  of  apostolic  hands  was  uniformly,  if 
not  invariably,  attended  by  the  working  of  miracles,  and 
the  act  had  no  necessary  connection  with  the  remission 
of  sins,  which  was  alone  effected  by  obedience  to  the 
gospel,  or  "the  obedience  of  the  faith."  It  is  said  of 
Stephen,  after  he  had,  in  common  with  others,  received 
the  laying  on  of  apostolic  hands:  "And  Stephen,  full 
of  faith  and  power,  did  great  wonders  and  miracles 
among  the  people."  (Acts  vi.  8.)  "!N"ow  when  the 
apostles,  who  were  at  Jerusalem,  heard  that  Samaria 
had  received  the  word  of  God,  they  sent  them  Peter  and 
John;  who,  when  the}7  were  come  down,  prayed  for 
them  and  they  received  the  Holy  Spirit.  .  .  .  Then 
laid  they  their  hand  on  them  and  they  received  the  Holy 
Spirit."  (Acts  viii.  14-17.)  Here  we  see  that  after  the 
apostles  had  received  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  a  miraculous 
endowment,  they  had  power  to  impart  the  same  miracu- 
lous gift  to  others.  In  the  case  of  Cornelius  the  miracle 
occurred  before  baptism  in  water;  in  this  case — in  the 
case  of  the  Samaritans — the  miracle  occurred  after  baptism 
in  water;  facts  which  go  to  show  that  God  worked 
miracles  in  the  days  of  the  apostles  when  and  where  he 
pleased,  without  reference  to  the  personal  obedience  of 
the  sinner.  Paul  could  not  work  miracles  until  he  re- 
ceived the  Holy  Spirit.  "And  Ananias  went  his  way 
[especially  directed  by  the  Lord]  and  entered  into  the 
house;  and  putting  his  hands  upon  him,  said,  Brother 
Saul,  the  Lord,  even  Jesus,  who  appeared  to  thee  in  the 
way,  as  thou  earnest,  hast  sent  me,  that  thou  mightest 
receive  thy  sight  and  be  filled  with  the  Holy  Spirit.'' 
(Acts  ix.  15-17.)  Here,  again,  baptism  in  water  took 
place  after  the  miracle  of  the  Holy  Spirit;  for  after  Paul 


318  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

had  received  sight  (being  physically  blind)  he  "arose 
and  was  baptized." 

When  Paul  camo  to  Ephesus  he  found  certain  disciples 
of  John — probably  converts  of  Apollos — to  whom  he 
thus  spoke:  "Have  you  received  the  Holy  Spirit  since 
you  believed?  And  they  said  to  him,  "We  have  not  so 
much  as  heard  whether  there  be  any  Holy  Spirit.  And 
he  said  to  them,  Unto  what,  then,  were  you  baptized? 
And  they  said,  Unto  John's  baptism.  Then  said  Paul, 
John  indeed  baptized  with  the  baptism  of  repentance, 
saying  to  the  people  that  they  should  believe  oti  him 
who  should  come  after  him,  that  is,  on  Christ  Jesus. 
When  they  heard  this  they  were  baptized  in  the  name 
of  the  Lord  Jesus.  And  when  Paul  had  laid  his  hands 
upon  them,  the  Holy  Spirit  came  on  them,  and  and  they 
spake,  with  tongues  and  prophesied"" — as  a  direct  result  of 
this  miraculous  impartation.  (Acts  xix.)  Here  the 
miracle  occurred  after  the  baptism  in  water.  Paul  him- 
self had  been  miraculously  called  to  be  an  apostle,  that 
he  might  testify  to  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  the  Christ, 
having  both  seen  his  glorified  person  and  heard  the 
voice  of  his  mouth;  but,  in  the  meantime,  in  order  to 
obtain  the  remission  of  his  sins,  he  was  obliged  to  do 
then  what  every  sinner  must  do  now.  (Acts  ix.,  xxii.) 

If  only  religious  teachers  could  see  and  appreciate 
this  highly  important  distinction  between  the  ordinary 
and  the  extraordinary — between  what  officially  belongs 
to  the  apostles  and  what  belongs  to  uninspired  men, 
what  a  vast  amount  of  mental  perplexity  and  theological 
confusion  and  useless  speculation  might  be  saved.  Why 
do  not  men  discriminate  between  the  age  of  miracles 
and  the  age  in  which  we  now  live?  If  we,  indeed,  have 
indicated  to  us  in  "the  gospel  of  our  salvation"  a  "more 
excellent  way"  than  the  working  of  miracles,  let  us  dis- 


REFORMATORY    MOVEMENTS.  319 

miss  from  our  minds  the  idea  of  miraculous  interposi- 
tion, as  having  no  direct  connection  with  our  own 
personal  salvation,  and  let  us,  as  wise  and  prudent  men, 
ahide  the  order  of  heaven.  God  reveals  the  truth;  we 
obey  the  truth.  God  reveals  our  Savior;  we  believe 
Christ  to  he  the  Son  of  God,  and  submit  to  the  condi- 
tions of  salvation. 

THE  WORD  AS  REVEALED  BY  THE   HOLY  SPIRIT. 

We  know  nothing  of  the  secret  counsels  of  God.  We 
know  nothing  of  unrevealed  truth.  But  Paul  says  that 
"the  mystery  which  has  been  hid  from  ages  and  from 
generations"  is  "now  made  manifest  to  his  saints;  to 
whom  God  would  make  known  what  is  the  riches  of 
the  glory  of  this  nrystery  among  the  Gentiles;  which  is 
Christ  in  [among]  yon,  the  hope  of  glory."  (Col.  i.  26, 
27.)  Paul,  in  the  close  of  his  epistle  to  the  Romans, 
says:  "Now  to  him  who  is  able  to  establish  you  accord- 
ing to  my  gospel,  and  the  proclamation  of  Jesus  Christ, 
according  to  the  revelation  of  the  secret,  concealed  in 
the  times  of  the  ages  (but  is  now  made  manifest  by  the 
prophetic  writings,  and  by  the  commandment  of  the 
eternal  God  is  made  known  to  all  the  Gentiles,  in  order 
to  the  obedience  of  faith)  to  the  wise  God  alone,  through 
Jesus  Christ,  to  whom  be  the  glory  forever."  (Rom. 
xvi.  25, 26,  Alacknight's  translation.)  Again  to  the  Ephe- 
sians,  Paul  writes:  "For  this  reason,  I,  Paul,  the  pris- 
oner of  Jesus  Christ  for  you  Gentiles,  if,  indeed,  you 
have  heard  of  the  administration  of  the  favor  of  God, 
which  was  given  me  for  you,  that  by  revelation  the  se- 
cret was  made  known  to  me  .  .  .  which  in  former 
ages  was  not  made  known  to  the  sons  of  men,  as  it  is 
now  revealed  to  his  holy  apostles  and  prophets  by  the  Spirit. 
,  .  .  To  me,  the  least  of  all  saints,  was  this  favor  given, 


?20  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

to  publish  among  the  Gentiles  the  unsearchable  riches 
of  Christ;  and  to  make  all  see  what  is  the  administra- 
tion of  the  secret,  which  had  been  hid  from  the  ages  by 
God  who  created  all  things."  (Eph.  iii.  1-9,  Macknight's 
translation.) 

By  these  and  parallel  passages,  it  will  be  seen  that  it 
was  the  office  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  reveal  the  truth, 
and,  in  revealing  the  truth,  to  make  known  the  plan  of 
salvation.  The  Savior  thus  addressed  himself  to  his 
apostles:  "Nevertheless,  I  tell  you  the  truth;  it  is  expe- 
dient [or  good]  for  you  that  I  go  away;  for  if  I  go  not 
away,  the  Comforter  will  not  come  to  you ;  but  if  I  de- 
part, I  will  send  him  to  you.  And  when  he  is  come,  he 
will  convict  the  world  of  sin,  and  of  righteousness,  and 
of  judgment;  of  sin,  because  they  believe  not  on  me;  of 
righteousness,  because  I  go  to  my  Father,  and  you  see 
me  no  more;  of  judgment,  because  the  Prince  of  this 
world  is  judged."  (John  xvi.  7-11.) 

By  this  testimony  we  learn  that  the  Holy  Spirit  re- 
vealed the  plan  of  salvation  to  the  sinner;  and,  by  the 
power  of  gospel  truth,  we  also  learn,  that  the  sinner 
would  be  converted  to  Christ.  There  is  not  the  least 
intimation  here  of  a  special,  direct,  mystic  operation 
upon  the  mind  of  the  sinner;  but,  on  the  contrary,  the 
language  clearly  indicates  that  the  testimony  of  the  Scrip- 
tures— the  facts  of  the  gospel — were  intended  to  bear 
upon  the  understanding  and  conscience  of  the  sinner, 
in  order  to  the  illumination  of  his  mind,  in  order  to 
convict  him  of  sin,  and  also  to  make  known  to  him  the 
conditions  of  salvation.  On  the  day  of  Pentecost  the 
apostles  spake  as  the  Spirit  gave  them  utterance.  The 
tongue  of  the  apostle  Peter  was  guided  by  inspiration. 
An  ungodly  multitude — the  "betrayers  and  murderers" 
of  Jesus  Christ — stood  transfixed  before  the  apostle. 


REFORMATORY   MOVEMENTS.  £21 

He  gave  utterance  to  truth  that  caused  the  people  to 
tremble  with  fear.  He  used  hum-an  speech  in  conveying 
the  truth  to  the  hearts  of  the  paralyzed  people.  The 
truth  conveyed  to  their  hearts  was  divine  truth — the 
moral  power  of  God.  Three  thousand  were  pierced  to 
the  heart  by  the  words  spoken.  And  heing  convicted  by 
the  words  spoken,  they  cried  out,  "Men  and  brethren, 
what  shall  we  do?"  The  answer  of  the  apostle  was 
direct:  "Repent,  and  be  immersed  every  one  of  you  in 
the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  for  the  remission  of  sins,  and 
you  shall  receive  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit."  (Acts  ii.) 
This  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit  we  shall  notice  under  the 
same  head  further  on. 

We  quote  the  language  of  Christ  again:  "If  you  love 
me,  keep  my  commandments.  And  I  will  pray  the 
Father,  and  he  shall  give  you  [apostles]  another  Com- 
forter [the  Paraclete],  that  he  may  abide  with  you  for- 
ever; even  the  Spirit  of  truth;  whom  the  world  can  not 
receive,  because  it  sees  him  not,  neither  knows  him;  but 
you  [apostles]  know  him,  for  he  dwells  with  you,  and 
shall  be  in  you."  (John  xiv.  15-17.)  Again:  "But 
when  the  Comforter  is  come,  whom  I  will  send  to  you 
[apostles]  from  the  Father,  even  the  Spirit  of  truth,  which 
proceeds  from  the  Father,  he  shall  testify  of  me  (by 
means  of  language),  and  you  shall  also  bear  witness 
[testimony],  because  you  have  been  with  me  from  the 
beginning."  (John  xv.  26,  27.)  From  these  utterances 
of  Christ  we  discover  that  the  relation  which  the  Holy 
Spirit  sustained  to  the  apostles,  and,  we  might  say,  to 
Christians,  was  entirely  different  from  that  which  he 
sustained  to  the  unregenerate  world.  Here  it  is  posi- 
tively asserted  that  the  world  can  not  receive  the  Holy 
Spirit  in  the  same  sense  in  which  the  apostles  received 
him,  and  as  the  children  of  God  receive  him.  But,  for 


322  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

• 

the  enlightenment  and  conviction  of  the  sinner,  the 
Holy  Spirit  reveals  the  truth,  presents  the  arguments  of 
Scripture,  and  brings  to  bear  the  motive  power  of  the 
gospel.  The  Spirit  is  the  agent,  and  the  word  revealed 
is  the  instrument — the  sword  of  the  Spirit — whether 
wielded  by  apostles,  evangelists,  preachers  or  common 
disciples  of  Christ.  And  all  this  convicting  power,  as 
was  manifested  everywhere,  in  all  the  preaching  of  the 
apostles,  was  clothed  in  human  language,  through  which 
medium  alone  the  truth  was  communicated  to  the  hearts 
of  sinners.  We  dare  not  presume  to  limit  the  range 
and  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit;  nevertheless,  we  are 
only  authorized  to  proclaim  to  the  world  that  which  the 
Spirit  of  God  has  clearly  revealed.  "Revealed  things 
belong  to  us  and  to  our  children ;  but  secret  things  be- 
long to  God,"  and  hence  we  dare  not  "rush  in  where 
angels  fear  to  tread."  Paul  distinctly  informs  us  that 
the  Lord  had  committed  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  to 
"earthen  vessels,  that  the  excellency  of  the  power  may 
be  of  God,  arid  not  of  us."  The  Holy  Spirit  revealed 
the  message  of  salvation,  but  the  message  was  to  be 
borne  to  men  by  men.  Hence  Paul  inquires:  "How  then 
shall  they  call  on  him  in  whom  they  have  not  believed? 
And  how  shall  they  believe  in  him  of  whom  they  have 
not  heard?  And  how  shall  they  hear  without  a  preach- 
er? And  how  shall  they  preach,  except  they  be  sent?" 
(Rom.  x.  14,  15.)  This  one  passage  itself  is  sufficient 
forever  to  exclude  the  idea  of  an  abstract  operation  of 
the  Spirit  on  the  sinner's  heart. 

But,  if  possible,  to  render  this  proposition  still  more 
explicit  and  conclusive  we  quote  the  language  of  Christ 
again  :  "  These  things  have  I  spoken  to  you  [the  apos- 
tles], being  yet  present  with  you;  but  the  Comforter, 
which  is  the  Holy  Spirit,  whom  the  Father  will  send  in 


REFORMATORY   MOVEMENTS.  323 

my  name,  he  shall  teach  you  all  things,  anu  bring  all 
things  to  your  remembrance,  whatsoever  I  have  said  to 
you."  Again:  "  Ilowbeit  when  he,  the  Spirit  of  truth, 
is  come,  he  will  guide  you  into  all  truth:  for  he  shall  not 
speak  of  himself  [independently  of,  and  contrary  to  the 
mind  of  the  Father  and  the  Son],  but  whatever  he  shall 
hear,  that  shall  he  speak:  and  he  shall  show  you  things 
to  come."  (John  xiv.  26;  xvi.  13.)  If  these  apostles 
testified,  they  testified  with  their  lips;  and  if  they  used 
their  lips,  they  made  use  of  language;  and  if  they  used 
language,  this  language,  as  the  vehicle  of  inspired  ideas, 
conveyed  the  glad  tidings  of  salvation  to  the  world. 

On  the  day  of  Pentecost,  when  the  apostles  received 
"the  promise  of  the  Father" — the  endowment  of  the 
Holy  Spirit — "the  law  of  the  Spirit  of  life  in  Christ 
Jesus,  which  makes  us  free  from  the  law  of  sin  and 
death,"  was  revealed;  and  this  "law  of  the  Spirit," 
which  is  "the  gospel  of  our  salvation,"  superseded  the 
law  of  Moses — the  law  of  condemnation,  "the  letter 
that  kills."  (Rom.  viii.)  In  this  "law  of  the  Spirit," 
which  is  variously  represented  by  the  apostle  as  "  the 
gospel,"  the  "law  of  liberty,"  the  "law  of  faith,"  etc., 
the  conditions  of  salvation  are  found,  as  everywhere 
proclaimed  in  the  apostolic  age.  If,  in  the  conversion 
of  a  sinner,  there  is  a  power  above  and1  beyond  the  re- 
vealed truth  necessary  to  intensify  and  consummate  the 
process  of  the  new  creation  in  the  image  of  Christ,  the 
knowledge  of  such  a  fact  is  not  recorded  upon  the  pages 
of  inspiration.  When  Paul  emphatically  declares  that 
"the  gospel  is  the  power  of  God  unto  [or,  in  order  to] 
salvation,"  which  gospel  consists  in  three  fundamental 
facts — the  death,  the  burial  and  the  resurrection  of  Je- 
sus Christ  from  the  dead;  and  when  we  feel  assured  that 
faith  in  Christ  as  our  personal  Savior,  and  obedience  to 


o24  GOSPEL   PEINCIPLES. 

his  gospel,  positively  and  without  doubt,  secures  our 
redemption  from  sin,  and  from  all  its  fearful  consequen- 
ces, why  perplex  and  delude  ourselves  upon  mere  matters 
of  human  speculation,  and  about  which  the  revelation 
of  God  has  nothing  to  say? 

The  apostle  Peter  understood  this  matter  perfectly, 
when  writing  "to  the  strangers  scattered  throughout 
Pontus,  Galatia,  Cappadocia,  Asia  [Minor]  and  Bithy- 
nia,"  he  said:  "To  whom  [the  prophets]  it  was  revealed, 
that  not  to  themselves,  but  to  us  [the  apostles],  they  did 
minister  the  things  which  are  now  reported  to  you  by 
them  who  have  preached  the  gospel  to  you  with  the  Holy 
Spirit  sent  down  from  heaven.'"  (1  Pet.  i.  12. )  And  in 
the  last  verse  of  this  same  chapter,  he  emphasizes  the 
declaration  by  saying,  "But  the  word  of  the  Lord  en- 
dures forever.  And  this  is  the  word  which  by  the  gospel 
is  preached  to  you."  Such  unmistakable  and  irrefutable 
testimony  as  this  forever  declares  all  modern  systems  of 
mystic  regeneration  unscriptural  and  false. 

Paul  sets  the  matter  before  the  Corinthian  Church 
thus:  "For  the  preaching  of  the  cross  [the  gospel]  is  to 
them  who  perish  foolishness;  but  to  us  who  are  saved, 
it  is  the  power  of  God.'"  In  the  same  chapter,  he  declares 
"Christ  to  be  the  power  of  God  and  the  wisdom  of  God." 
(1  Cor.  i.  18, 24.)  Thus  he  writes  to  the  church  at  Rome : 
"Now  to  him  that  is  of  power  to  establish  you  accord- 
ing to  my  gospel  and  the  preaching  of  Jesus  Christ,  ac- 
cording to  the  revelation  of  the  mystery,  which  was  kept 
secret  since  the  world  began,  but  now  is  made  manifest; 
and  by  the  Scriptures  of  the  prophets,  according  to  the 
commandment  of  the  everlasting  God,  made  known  to 
all  nations  for  the  obedience  of  [the]  faith."  (Rom.  xvi. 
25-27.)  Paul,  speaking  to  the  Corinthians  of  the  things 
that  are  "prepared  for  them  who  love  God,''  says :  "God 


REFORMATORY   MOVEMENTS.  325 

has  revealed  them  to  us  by  his  Spirit;  for  the  Spirit  search- 
es all  things,  yea,  the  deep  things  of  God.  For  what 
man  knows  the  things  of  a  man,  save  the  spirit  of  man 
which  is  in  him?  Even  so  the  things  of  God  knows  no 
man,  but  the  Spirit  of  God!  Now  we  have  received, 
not  the  spirit  of  the  world,  hut  the  Spirit  which  is  of 
God,  that  we  might  know  the  things  which  are  freely 
given  to  us  of  God ;  which  things  [not  abstractions]  we 
speak,  not  in  the  words  which  man's  wisdom  teaches, 
but  which  the  Holy  Spirit  teaches  [through  the  gospel], 
comparing  spiritual  things  spiritually."  (1  Cor.  ii.  10- 
13.)  The  apostle  John  accords  with  Peter  and  Paul 
when  he  thus  expresses  himself:  "We  are  of  God;  he 
who  knows  God  hears  us;  hereby  know  we  the  Spirit  of 
truth  and  the  spirit  of  error."  (1  John  iv.  6.)  If,  then, 
all  these  things  were  brought  to  the  recollection  of  the 
apostles,  and  they  were  guided  by  inspiration  into  all  the 
truth,  and  all  that  truth  is  now  in  our  possession  as  re- 
spects the  scheme  of  redemption,  what  further  need  have 
we  of  testimony? 

We  intend  a  thorough  investigation  of  this  question, 
and  hence  the  subject  of  the  Spirit  will  be  pursued. 

THE   CONFIRMATION  OF  THE  REVEALED  WORD. 

Confirm  means  to  make  strong,  to  ratify,  to  make 
conclusive.  That  which  was  legislated  into  existence  by 
the  Almighty,  and  executed  by  the  Son  of  God,  was  final- 
ly confirmed  or  ratified  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  The  word 
revealed  was  confirmed  by  attestations  of  supernatural 
power.  After  the  apostles  received  the  great  commis- 
sion, "they  went  forth  and  preached  (Mark  xvi.  20) 
everywhere,  the  Lord  working  with  them,  and  confirm- 
ing the  word  with  signs  following."  Paul  says:  "Where- 
fore tongues  [miracles]  are  for  a  sign,  not  to  them  icho  be- 


326  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

lieve,  but  to  them  who  believe  not:  but  prophesying  [teach- 
ing, as  is  the  meaning  in  this  connection]  serves  not  for 
them  who  believe  not,  but  for  them  who  believe."  (1 
Cor.  xiv.  22.)  Isaiah  says:  "Bind  up  the  testimony,  seal 
the  law  am.ong  my  disciples.  And  I  will  wait  upon  the 
Lord,  that  hides  his  face  from  the  house  of  Jacob,  and 
I  will  look  for  him.  Behold,  I  and  the  children  whom 
the  Lord  hath  given  me,  are  for  signs  and  for  wonders 
in  Israel  from  the  Lord  of  hosts,  who  dwelleth  in  Mount 
Zion."  (Isa.  viii.  16-18.)  According  to  Isa.  viii.  19, 
20,  and  Rom.  x.  6-10,  all  men  are  prohibited  from  seek- 
ing after  new  revelations.  In  regard  to  the  confirmation 
of  the  word,  Paul  says:  "How  shall  we  escape  if  we 
neglect  [we  Christians]  so  great  salvation,  which  at  the 
first  began  to  be  spoken  by  the  Lord,  and  wr.s  confirmed 
to  us  by  them  who  heard  him.  G-od  also. bearing  them 
witness,  both  with  signs  and  wonders,  and  with  divers 
.miracles,  and  gifts  of  the  Hoty  Spirit,  according  to  his 
own  will."  (Ileb.  ii.  3,  4.) 

We  shall  now  give  some  illustrations  of  what  is  meant 
by  the  confirmation  of  the  word  revealed.  A  few  days 
after  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  in  Jerusalem  and  after 
the  establishment  of  the  model  Church,  Peter,  on  his 
way  to  the  temple,  about  three  o'clock,  cured  a  man 
who  had  been  lame  and  helpless  from  his  birth.  The 
helpless  man  expected  alms  of  Peter,  but  Peter,  fasten- 
ing his  eyes  upon  him,  with  John,  said:  "Look  on  us. 
.  .  .  Silver  and  gold  have  I  none;  but  such  as  I  have 
give  I  thee:  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  of  Nazareth 
rise  up  and  walk.  And  he  took  him  by  the  right  hand, 
and  lifted  him  up;  and  immediately  his  feet  and  ankle- 
bones  received  strength.  And  he,  leaping  up,  stood  and 
walked  and  entered  with  them  into  the  temple,  walk- 
ing, and  leaping,  and  praising  God."  (Acts  iii.  1-8.) 


REFORMATORY   MOVEMENTS.  327 

Here  is  an  example  of  the  confirmation  of  the  word  of 
the  gospel  revealed  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  It  was  a  physi- 
cal miracle,  and  nothing  is  said  which  goes  to  show  that 
Peter  preached  the  gospel  to  the  lame  man  at  this  time. 
If  the  lame  man  was  converted  to  Christ,  it  took  place- 
after  the  miracle  was  performed,  and  by  the  preaching 
of  the  gospel. 

We  have  a  fearful  illustration  of  the  power  of  God, 
in  those  days  of  miracles,  in  the  case  of  Ananias  and 
Sapphira  his  wife,  whom  the  Lord  instantaneously  struck 
down  dead,  because  they  lied  to  the  Holy  Spirit,  by  rep- 
resenting that  they  had  laid  the  price  of  their  entire 
possession  at  the  apostles'  feet,  when,  at  the  same  time, 
they  had  "kept  back  part  of  the  price."  Surely,  if,  as 
some  preachers  boldly  allege,  God  converts  sinners  to 
Christ  by  a  miracle,  this  miracle  produced  a  strange  ef- 
fect. In  consequence  of  this  wonderful  display  of  the 
terrible  power  of  God,  "great  fear  came  upon  all  the 
Church,  and  upon  as  many  as  heard  these  things.  And 
by  the  hands  of  the  apostles  were  many  signs  and  won- 
ders wrought  among  the  people;  .  .  .  insomuch 
that  they  brought  forth  the  sick  into  the  streets,  and 
laid  them  on  beds  and  couches,  that  at  least  the  shadow 
of  Peter  passing  by,  might  overshadow  some  of  them. 
There  came  also  a  multitude  out  of  the  cities  round 
about  to  Jerusalem,  bringing  sick  folks,  and  them  who 
were  tormented  with  evil  spirits,  and  they  were  healed 
every  one."  (Acts  v.)  These  miracles  were  a  confirm- 
ation of  the  word,  harmonizing  with  what  Christ  said 
to  his  apostles  when  he  authorized  them  to  go  into  all 
the  world  to  preach  the  gospel,  and  making  this  prom- 
ise to  them — a  promise  which  he  never  made  to  any 
other  class  of  men:  "And  these  signs  shall  follow  them 
that  believe  [these  miracles  shall  be  reported  to  the 
27 


cl28  GOSPEL    PKINCIPLES. 

credit  of  the  apostles,  endowed  with  the  Holy  Spirit]: 
In  my  name  shall  they  cast  out  demons;  they  shall  speak 
with  new  tongues;  they  shall  take  up  serpents;  and  if 
they  drink  any  deadly  thing,  it  shall  not  hurt  them; 
they  shall  lay  hands  on  the  sick,  and  they  shall  recover." 
And  then  we  learn  that  "they  went  forth,  and  preached 
everywhere,  the  Lord  working  with  them,  and  confirm- 
ing the  word  with  signs  following."  (Mark  xvi.  16-20.) 
"And  there  sat  a  certain  man  at  Lystra,  impotent  in 
his  feet,  being  a  cripple  from  his  mother's  womb,  who 
had  never  walked :  the  same  heard  Paul  speak,  who 
steadfastly  beholding  him,  and  perceiving  that  he  had 
faith  to  be  healed,  said  with  a  loud  voice,  Stand  upright 
on  thy  feet.  And  he  leaped  and  walked.  And  when 
the  people  saw  what  Paul  had  done,  they  lifted  up  their 
voices,  saying,  The  gods  have  come  down  to  us  in  the 
likeness  of  men.  And  they  called  Barnabas,  Jupiter; 
and  Paul,  Mercurius,  because  he  was  the  chief  speaker." 
(Acts  xiv.  8-12.)  Here  was  a  physical  miracle,  but  not 
moral  regeneration,  which  only  can  be  accomplished  by 
bringing  the  truth — the  gospel — which  is  "the  power 
of  God,"  in  contact  with  the  understanding  and  con- 
science of  the  sinner. 

While  preaching  in  the  streets  of  Philippi,  Paul  re- 
stored a  certain  woman  to  her  right  mind,  by  command- 
ing, in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  evil  spirit  of  divin- 
ation to  come  out  of  her,  but  the  miracle  did  not  convert 
the  woman  to  Christ.  In  connection  with  this  same 
event,  in  the  same  city,  while  Paul  and  Silas  were  sing- 
ing praises  to  God  in  the  Philippian  prison,  where  they 
had  been  imprisoned  by  their  pagan  persecutors,  "sud- 
denly there  was  a  great  earthquake,  so  that  the  founda- 
tions of  the  prison  were  shaken;  and  immediately  all 
the  doors  were  opened,  and  every  one's  bands  were 


REFORMATORY   MOVEMENTS.  329 

loosed."  (Acts  xiv.  and  xxi.)  After  this  miracle,  the 
Philippian  jailer  heard  the  word  of  the  Lord,  believed  in 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  was  immediately  immersed, 
with  all  his  house,  who  believed  with  him,  and  rejoiced 
with  him.  It  is  recorded  that  while  Paul  was  in  Ephe- 
sus,  "disputing  daily  in  the  school  of  one  Tyrannus,  for 
the  space  of  two  years,  that  God  wrought  special  mir- 
acles by  the  hands  of  Paul,  so  that  from  his  body  were 
brought  to  the  sick  handkerchiefs  or  aprons,  and  the 
diseases  departed  from  them,  and  the  evil  spirits  went 
out  of  them."  (Acts  xix.) 

Paul,  on  his  journey  to  Rome,  having  made  his  appeal 
to  Csesar,  while  crossing  the  Mediterranean  Sea,  was  ship- 
wrecked with  other  prisoners,  and  he  and  they  cast  upon 
the  island  of  Melita.  The  record  reads:  "And  the  bar- 
barous people  showed  us  no  little  kindness :  for  they 
kindled  a  fire  and  received  us  every  one,  because  of  the 
present  rain  and  because  of  the  cold.  And  when  Paul 
had  gathered  a  bundle  of  sticks,  and  laid  them  on  the 
fire,  there  came  a  viper  out  of  the  heat,  and  fastened  on 
his  hand.  And  when  the  barbarians  saw  the  venomous 
beast  hang  on  his  hand,  they  said  among  themselves, 
~No  doubt  this  man  is  a  murderer,  whom,  though  he  has 
escaped  the  sea,  yet  vengeance  suffers  not  to  live.  And 
he  shook  off  the  beast  into  the  fire,  and  felt  no  harm.'' 
(Acts  xxviii.  1-5.)  This  miracle  did  not  tell  these  bar- 
barians who  Jesus  Christ  was;  from  the  miracle  itself 
they  learned  nothing  of  the  life  and  character  of  the 
Messiah;  learned  nothing  of  the  revealed  truth,  and  of 
the  plan  of  salvation;  learned  nothing  of  the  personal 
obedience  to  the  gospel;  did  not  even  learn  that  they 
were  without  hope  and  without  God  in  the  world. 

All  the  miracles  recorded  in  Acts  of  the  Apostles  were 
intended  to  be  confirmatory  of  the  revealed  word. 


330  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

These  divine  attestations  were  necessary  to  fully  estab- 
lish the  religion  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  to  give  it  preced- 
ence and  superiority  over  all  the  religions  of  earth.  But 
while  all  these  miracles  were  performed  with  a  view  of 
opening  the  eyes  of  unbelievers,  it  required,  at  the  same 
time,  the  power  of  the  revealed  truth  to  affect  the  heart, 
and  to  transform  the  spiritual  nature  of  man.  The 
Spirit  ever  speaks  through  the  revealed  truth,  and  never 
without  intelligible  language.  The  belief  of  the  truth, 
and  the  obedience  of  the  gospel,  which  saved  and  sanc- 
tified sinners  in  the  apostolic  days,  will,  by  the  same  appli- 
cation, save  sinners  now.  How  dare  we  make  the  Holy 
Spirit  contradict  himself,  by  adding  a  supposed  power 
to  the  gospel  which  God  has  never  revealed,  and  which 
simply  amounts  to  a  priestly  assumption?  The  apostles, 
guided  infallibly  by  the  Spirit,  preached  only  "Christ 
and  him  crucified."  When  theologians  and  ministerial 
mountebanks  torture  the  Spirit  to  testify  to  a  mode  of 
salvation,  in  the  present  day,  which  he  never  testified  to 
under  the  direct  supervision  of  the  apostles,  they  are  not 
only  found  guilty  of  committing  an  egregious  blunder, 
but  they  are  perpetrating  a  terrible  sin.  Let  us  illustrate. 
A  case  is  tried  in  a  civil  court.  A  change  of  venue  is 
called,  and  the  case  is  transferred  to  another  court.  The 
same  witnesses  are  called  to  testify  on  both  occasions. 
Suppose  the  witnesses  in  the  second  trial  contradict  the 
testimony  they  gave  on  the  first  trial — what  would  be 
the  verdict  of  the  people?  Would  they  not  cry  out  that 
the  witnesses  had  perjured  themselves?  Now,  then, 
what  disposition  will  God  make  of  men — professedly 
leaders  of  the  people,  and  professedly  servants  of  Jesus 
Christ — who  will  make  the  Holy  Spirit  contradict  his 
own  testimony,  by  teaching  a  mode  of  salvation  in  the 
present  age  which  was  not  taught  in  the  apostolic  age  ? 


REFORMATORY   MOVEMENTS.  331 

Let  the  people  hear  what  "the  Spirit  and  the  Bride  say" 
— in  intelligible  words,  which  all  men  can  understand. 
While  Peter  was  on  the  housetop  in  Joppa,  and  "thought 
on  the  vision,  the  Spirit  said  to  him  [in  words  to  be  un- 
derstood], Behold,  three  men  seek  thee.  Arise,  there- 
fore, and  get  thee  down,  and  go  with  them,  doubting- 
nothing,  for  I  have  sent  them;''  and  Peter,  in  rehears- 
ing the  conversion  of  Cornelius  and  his  household,  thus 
alludes  to  the  case:  "And  he  showed  us  how  he  [Cor- 
nelius] had  seen  an  angel  in  his  house,  which  stood  and 
said  to  him,  Send  men  to  Joppa,  and  call  for  Simon, 
whose  surname  is  Peter;  who  shall  tell  thee  words  where- 
by thou  and  all  thy  house  shall  be  saved."  (Acts  xi.  13, 
14.)  "Now  the  Spirit  speaks  expressly  that  in  the  latter 
times  some  shall  depart  from  the  faith,  giving  heed  to 
seducing  spirits,  and  doctrines  of  demons,"  etc.  (1  Tim. 
iv.  1. )  Thus  we  see  that  when  the  Spirit  spoke  he  used 
words;  the  words  conveyed  ideas — conveyed  "the  mind 
of  the  Spirit" — and  the  ideas  were  always  tangible  and 
intelligible. 

THE  GIFT  OF  THE  HOLY  SPIRIT. 

We  must  distinguish  between  the  gift  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  as  the  power  of  working  miracles,  and  the  gift  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  as  the  promise  of  God  to  his  obedient 
and  ever-faithful  children.  Paul  says:  "There  are 
diversities  of  gifts,  but  the  same  Spirit.  And  there -are 
differences  of  administrations,  but  the  same  Lord.  And 
there  are  diversities  of  operations,  but  it  is  the  same  God 
who  works  all  in  all.  But  the  manifestation  of  the 
Spirit  is  given  to  every  man  to  profit  withal.  For  to 
one  is  given  by  the  Spirit,  the  word  of  wisdom,  to  an- 
other the  word  of  knowledge,  by  the  same  Spirit.  To 
another,  faith,  by  the  same  Spirit;  to  another  the  gifts 


332  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

of  healing,  by  the  same  Spirit;  to  another  the  working 
of  miracles,  to  another  prophecies,  to  another  the  dis- 
cerning of  spirits,  to  another  divers  kinds  of  tongues, 
to  another  the  interpretation  of  tongues.  But  all  these 
work  that  one  and  the  self-same  Spirit,  dividing  to  every 
man  severally  as  he  will."  (1  Cor.  xii.  4-11.) 

All  these  endowments  evidently  refer  to  the  power  of 
working  miracles,  and  must  not  be  confounded  with 
"the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit"  as  a  promise  made  to  the 
ordinary  Christian,  who  is  not  expected  to  work  miracles 
as  they  were  worked  in  the  apostolic  age.  And  yet 
"the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit,"  as  promised  on  the  day 
of  Pentecost  to  the  three  thousand  converts,  may  have 
included  the  working  of  miracles,  while  the  apostles 
were  present  in  person  with  the  churches  of  Christ. 
Whether  this  "gift"  to  the  ordinary  Christian  means 
the  actual  personal  indwelling  of  the  Spirit,  or  an  abstract 
indwelling  of  the  Spirit,  or  the  indwelling  of  "the  mind 
of  the  Spirit,"  are  questions  which  have  been  the  source 
of  endless  and  perplexing  talk.  "We  do  not  believe  in 
the  "word  alone"  system,  nor  in  the  "Spirit  alone" 
system;  but  we  do  believe  that  if  the  word  of  the  Spirit 
is  in  the  heart  of  the  Christian  the  Spirit  is  present  with 
the  word;  the  how  of  it  we  do  not  know:  we  walk  by 
faith.  We  can  not  conceive  of  an  abstract  principle, 
nor  of  the  bare  isolated  word  dwelling  separately  in  the 
heart  of  a  Christian.  We  confidently  assert,  because  of 
the  absence  of  rebutting  testimony,  that  where  the 
word  or  mind  of  the  Spirit  is  not  received  into  the  heart, 
there  the  Spirit  does  not  go. 

Paul  says:  "Let  this  mind  be  in  you,  which  was  also 
in  Christ  Jesus."  "  Let  the  word  of  Christ  dwell  in  you 
richly."  (Col.  iii.  16;  Phil.  ii.  5.)  "The  word  of 
Christ"  evidently  is  the  same  as  "the  mind  of  Christ." 


.    REFORMATORY   MOVEMENTS.  833 

Christ  is  certainly  present  with  his  own  word  wherever 
received,  but  in  what  metaphysical  sense  we  can  not  ex- 
plain, any  more  than  we  can  explain  how  God  in  the 
physical  world  is  present  working  in  the  seed  which  has 
been  deposited  in  the  ground.  The  body  is  represented 
as  "the  temple  of  the  Holy  Spirit,"  because  it  is  by  the 
•truth  which  the  Holy  Spirit  has  revealed  that  the 
heart  is  sanctified,  and  the  body  consecrated  to  the 
service  of  the  Lord.  (1  Cor.  vi.  19.)  It  is  after  the 
sinner  obeys  the  gospel  and  not  before  he  obeys  that  he 
receives  "the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit."  Paul,  in  address- 
ing Christians  at  Ephesus,  says:  "That  we  should  be 
to  the  praise  of  his  glory,  who  first  trusted  in  Christ. 
In  whom  you  also  trusted,  after  that  you  heard  the  word 
of  truth,  the  gospel  of  your  salvation :  in  whom  also 
after  that  'you  believed,  you  were  sealed  with  the  Holy 
Spirit  of  promise,  which  is  the  earnest  [or  pledge]  of  our 
inheritance,  until  the  redemption  of  the  purchased  pos- 
session." (Eph.  i.  13.)  The  promise  of  the  Father  is 
that  the  Spirit  shall  abide  with  the  Christian  forever,  and 
through  the  word  be  the  constant  luminary  of  the 
Church,  the  temple  of  God,  which  is  composed  of  living 
stones  or  regenerated  men  and  women. 

Christians  are  represented  as  "walking  after  the 
Spirit;"  as  "minding  the  things  of  the  Spirit;"  as  being 
"in  the  Spirit;"  as  having  the  Spirit  of  Christ;  as 
"mortifying  the  deeds  of  the  body  through  the  Spirit;" 
as  being  "led  by  the  Spirit;''  as  having  "received  the 
Spirit  of  adoption;"  and  the  Spirit  is  represented  as 
"dwelling  in  our  mortal  bodies."  (Rom.  viii.)  In  the 
same  chapter  wTe  learn  that  the  "Spirit  bears  witness 
with  our  spirit  [the  mind  of  the  Spirit  bears  witness 
with  the  mind  of  God's  children]  that  we  are  the  chil- 
dren of  God;"  that  "the  Spirit  helps  our  infirmities," 


GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

and  that  he  "makes  intercession  for  us" — the  children 
of  God.  None  of  these  beautiful  and  expressive  terms 
apply  to  the  ungodly  and  disobedient.  They  indicate 
the  tender  and  intimate  relations  which  exist  between 
the  promised  Comforter  and  the  adopted  children  of 
God.  The  final  glorification  of  the  saints  depends  on 
the  fact  that  the  Spirit  of  God  dwells  in  their  mortal 
bodies.  Says  Paul:  "!N"ow  if  any  man  have  not  the 
Spirit  of  Christ,  he  is  none  of  his.  And  if  Christ  be  in 
yon  [not  literally],  the  body  [or  the  passions  in  the  body] 
is  dead  because  of  sin  ;  but  the  spirit  [of  the  man]  is  life 
because  of  the  righteousness.  But  if  the  Spirit  of  him 
who  raised  up  Jesus  from  the  dead,  dwell  in  you  [Chris- 
tians], he  who  raised  up  Christ  from  the  dead,  shall  also 
quicken  [make  alive]  your  mortal  bodies  by  his  Spirit 
who  dwells  in  you."  From  which  premises  we  conclude 
that  unless  we  receive  and  retain  in  our  hearts  "the 
mind  of  the  Spirit"  and  are  led  by  the  words  of  the 
Spirit,  we  shall  never  be  raised  up  to  glory  and  im- 
mortality. They  who  are  the  "sons  of  God"  are  "  led 
by  the  Spirit  of  God,"  and  having  received  "the  Spirit 
of  adoption,"  they,  as  "  new-born  babes,"  are  enabled  to 
cry,  "Abba,  Father"  (Rom.  viii.).  Paul  writes  in  the 
same  style  to  the  Galatian  Christians,  when  he  says: 
"Because  you  are  sons  [once  having  been  aliens]  God 
has  sent  forth  the  Spirit  of  his  Son  into  your  hearts, 
crying,  Abba,  Father."  He  addressed  them  as  the 
adopted  sons  of  God,  and  not  as  unbelieving  and  dis- 
obedient aliens.  The  Spirit  of  God  strives  with  the 
wicked  world  as  in  the  days  of  Xoah,  through  the  word 
of  God,  which  is  "the  sword  of  the  Spirit,"  and  which 
was  wielded  by  prophets  and  apostles. 

While  it  is  true  that  sinners  must  be  convicted  by  a 
Divine  revelation,  as  revealed  by  the  Spirit,  and  also  be 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  335 

convicted  and  convinced  by  the  arguments  of  the  Script- 
ures, in  order  to  the  obedience  of  the  faith,  it  is  equally 
true  that  the  children  of  God  must  "pray  in  the  Spirit, 
and  keep  themselves  in  the  love  of  God."  (Judo  20,  21.) 
They  must  "pray  always,  with  all  prayer,  and  supplica- 
tion in  the  Spirit."  (Eph.  vi.  18.)  "Where  the  Spirit 
of  the  Lord  is,  there  is  liberty,"  because  it  is  "the  Law 
of  the  Spirit  of  Life  in  Christ  Jesus  that  makes  us  free 
from  the  law  of  sin  and  death."  (2  Cor.  iii.  17;  Rom. 
viii.  2.)  "But  if  you  [Christians]  are  led  by  the  Spirit" 
— the  law  of  the  Spirit,  or  "the  Spirit  of  truth" — you 
are  not  under  the  law  of  sin  and  death.  (Gal.  v.  18.) 
"  By  one  Spirit,"  both  Jews  and  Gentiles  have  access  to 
the  Father,  and  "through  the  Spirit"  the  children  of 
God  are  built  together,  for  an  habitation  of  God.  (Eph. 
ii.  18-22.)  "By  one  Spirit'' — instructed  by  "the  mind 
of  the  Spirit" — we  have  all  been  immersed  (ebaptistheemen} 
into  one  body,  whether  we  be  Jews  or  Gentiles,  . 
and  have  been  all  made  to  drink  into  one  Spirit.7'1  (1  Cor. 
xii.  13,  14.) 

The  Spirit  of  God  is  said  to  "rest  upon"  his  children 
in  tribulation.  "If  you  be  reproached  for  the  name  of 
Christ,  happy  are  you,  for  the  Spirit  of  the  glory  of  God 
rests  upon  you."  (1  Peter  iv,  12.)  Christians  are  said 
to  be  sanctified  by  the  Spirit.  "Elect  according  to  the 
foreknowledge  of  God  the  Father,  through  sanctification 
of  the  Spirit  unto  obedience  and  sprinkling  of  the  blood 
of  Jesus  Christ."  (1  Peter  i.  2,  4.)  God's  people  are 
sealed  by  the  Spirit.  "Now  he  who  established  us  with 
you,  in  Christ,  and  has  anointed  us  [typified  by  the 
anointing  of  kings  under  the  Jewish  dispensation],  is 
God,  who  has  also  sealed  us,  and  given  the  earnest 
[pledge]  of  the  Spirit  of  our  hearts."  (2  Cor.  i.  21,  22.) 
"Grieve  not  the  Holy  Spirit  of  God,  whereby  you  are 


336  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

sealed  to  the  day  of  redemption."  (Eph.  i.  13,  iv. 
30.) 

"The  allusion  to  the  seal,"  says  Bickersteth,  "as  a 
pledge  of  purchase,  would  be  peculiarly  intelligible  to 
the  Ephesians,  for  Ephesus  was  a  maritime  city,  and  an 
extensive  trade  in  timber  was  carried  on  there,  by  the 
shipmasters  of  the  neighoriug  ports.  The  method  of 
purchase  was  this :  The  merchant,  after  selecting  his 
timber,  stamped  it  with  his  own  signet,  which  was  an 
acknowledged  sign  of  ownership.  He  often  did  not 
carry  off'  his  possession  at  the  time;  it  was  left  in  the 
harbor  with  other  floats  of  timber;  and  in  due  time  the 
merchant  sent  a  trusty  agent  with  the  signet,  who,  find- 
ing that  lumber  which  bore  a  corresponding  impress, 
claimed  and  brought  it  away  for  the  Master's  use.  Thus, 
the  Holy  Spirit  impresses  on  the  soul  now,  the  image  of 
Jesus  Christ;  and  this  is  the  sure  pledge  of  the  ever- 
lasting inheritance." 

We  have  already  had  something  to  say  on  the  gift  of 
the  Spirit;  but  as  it  is  a  question  of  considerable  per- 
plexity, and,  as  a  consequence,  has  given  rise  to  much 
controversy,  we  shall  further  attempt  to  throw  light 
upon  it.  We  shall  show  that  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
was  peculiar  to  the  apostolic  age.  First,  we  remark, 
that  the  Spirit,  as  a  personality,  is  distinct  from  the  gift 
of  the  Spirit.  The  gift  of  the  Spirit  is  a  promise,  and 
not  a  command.  On  the  day  of  Pentecost,  Peter  said 
to  the  penitent  believers:  "Repent,  and  be  immersed 
every  one  of  you  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  for  the 
remission  of  sins,  and  you  shall  receive  the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  For  the  promise  is  to  you,  and  to  your 
children,  and  to  all  who  are  afar  off,  even  as  many  as 
the  Lord  our  God  shall  call."  In  Peter's  sermon,  from 
which  the  above  is  quoted  (Acts  ii.),  we  have  these  words: 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  337 

"Therefore,  being  by  the  right  hand  of  God  exalted,  and 
having  received  of  the  Father  the  promise  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,he  has  shed  forth  this,which  you  now  see  and  hear." 
In  a  general  sense,  all  who  obey  the  gospel  receive 
the  gift  of  the  Spirit  by  receiving  the  blessing  of  God 
through  the  gospel;  for  "the  gift  of  God  is  eternal  life 
through  Jesus  Christ;"  but  in  a  special  sense,  the  gift 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  the  power  of  working  miracles. 

By  reference  to  the  words  of  Peter  just  quoted,  it  will 
be  seen  that  the  remission  of  sins  was  one  thins:,  and  the 

O ' 

special  gift  of  working  miracles  in  the  future  altogether 
another  thing,  as  may  be  seen  by  tracing  out  the  work 
and  preaching  of  the  apostles,  consequent  upon  whose 
preaching  the  work  of  performing  miracles  followed,  in 
many  places  and  by  diverse  methods.  This  "gift"  on  the 
day  of  Pentecost  was  similar  to  that  bestowed  upon  the 
household  of  Cornelius,  the  first  Gentile  converts.  The 
accompaniments  of  this  special  gift  were  not  always  the 
same;  but,  as  in  the  Corinthian  Church,  it  was  given  to 
every  man  by  the  same  Spirit  to  profit  withal;  and  be- 
cause the  Corinthians  could  work  miracles,  they  were 
puffed  up  with  pride.  The  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit  was 
not  always  bestowed  in  the  same  manner,  nor  for  the 
same  purposes;  a  full  explanation  of  which  may  be  found 
in  1  Cor.  xii.  The  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  further 
explained  in  what  took  place  in  the  household  of  Cor- 
nelius, in  the  city  of  Csesarea.  It  is  said  that  when  the 
Holy  Spirit  fell  on  these  Gentile  converts,  on  that  event- 
ful occasion,  that  the  Jewish  brethren  who  accompanied 
Peter  were  astonished,  "because  that  the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  was  poured  out  upon  the  Gentiles."  When 
rehearsing  this  matter  before  his  Jewish  brethren,  after 
his  return  to  Jerusalem  (Acts  xi.),  Peter  said:  "And  as 
I  began  to  speak,  the  Holy  Spirit  fell  on  them,  even  as 


3C8  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

on  us  [apostles]  at  the  beginning,  and  I  remembered  the 
word  of  the  Lord,  how  he  said,  John  indeed  immersed 
in  water;  but  you  shall  be  immersed  in  the  Holy  Spirit. 
Since  then  God  gave  them  the  like  gift  as  he  did  to  us 
[apostles]  who  believed  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  what 
was  I,  that  I  could  withstand  God?" 

That  this  gift  of  the  Spirit  was  for  a  special  object, 
and  limited  to  the  apostolic  period,  and  that  it  was 
diverse  in  its  manifestations,  can  only  be  made  clear  by 
an  appeal  to  the  facts.  Philip,  who  was  only  an  evan- 
gelist, and  not  an  apostle,  had  preached  in  Samaria,  and 
there  made  a  number  of  converts.  This  news  having 
gone  to  Jerusalem,  the  headquarters  of  the  apostles,  the 
apostles  sent  down  Peter  and  John,  both  apostles,  who, 
on  arriving  at  the  place,  discovered  the  fact  "that  the 
Holy  Spirit  had  fallen  upon  none  of  them;  only  they 
were  immersed  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus,"  through 
whom  they  had  received  the  remission  of  sins,  and,  of 
course,  were  now  constituted  members  of  the  "one  body." 
The  apostles  then  prayed  "that  they  might  receive  the 
Holy  Spirit;"  and, having  "laid  their  hands  upon  them 
they  received  the  Holy  Spirit;"  in  pursuance  of  which 
miraculous  gift  they  were  at  once  enabled  to  perform 
miracles,  as  did  the  apostles  themselves.  (Acts  viii.) 
At  another  time,  when  Paul  arrived  at  Ephesus,  he 
found  certain  of  John's  disciples  there,  who  had  never 
heard  of  the  wonderful  demonstrations  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  but  knew  only  of  the  baptism  of  John;  but  who, 
after  listening  attentively  to  the  preaching  of  Paul, 
"were  immersed  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus,"  in 
obedience  to  which  command  they  obtained  the  remis- 
sion of  their  sins,  which  was  in  strict  harmony  with  the 
organic  law  of  induction  into  Christ's  kingdom,  as  an- 
nounced in  the  great  commission.  Then  "when  Paul 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  339 

laid  his  hands  upon  them  [who  were  already  Christians], 
the  Holy  Spirit  came  upon  them;"  and,  as  a  result,  corre- 
sponding with  similar  cases,  "they  spake  with  tongues  and 
prophesied."  (Acts  xix.) 

Paul,  writing  to  the  Corinthian  Church,  whose  mem- 
bers grew  proud  by  the  working  of  miracles,  thus  writes : 
"But  the  manifestation  [or  gift]  of  the  Spirit  is  given 
to  every  man  to  profit  withal.  For  to  one  is  given  by 
the  Spirit  the  word  of  wisdom;  to  another  the  word  of 
knowledge  by  the  same  Spirit;  to  another  faith  by  the 
same  Spirit;  to  another  the  gifts  of  healing  by  the  same 
Spirit;  to  another  the  working  of  miracles;  to  another 
prophecy;  to  another  discerning  of  spirits;  to  another 
divers  kinds  of  tongues;  to  another  the  interpretation  of 
tongues:  but  all  these  work  that  one  and  the  selfsame 
Spirit,  dividing  to  every  man  severally  as  he  will."  (1 
Cor.  xii.  7-11.) 

With  the  passing  away  of  the  apostles,  these  miracu- 
lous manifestations  ceased.  They  all  tended  toward  the 
perfection  of  the  body  of  Christ.  When  the  primitive 
Church  came  into  "the  unity  of  the  faith,  and  of  the 
knowledge  of  the  Son  of  God,  unto  a  perfect  man,  unto 
the  measure  of  the  stature  of  the  fullness  of  Christ  .  .  . 
making  increase  of  the  body  to  the  edification  of  itself 
in  love,"  the  special  gifts  of  working  miracles  were  dis- 
pensed with,  to  give  way  to  the  more  excellent  way  which 
works  by  love. 

THE  WITNESS  OF  THE  SPIRIT. 

"The  Spirit  itself  [himself]  bears  witness  with  our 
spirit  that  we  are  the  children  of  God."  This  language 
was  addressed  specifically  to  Christians — to  the  children 
of  God — and  not  to  sinful  and  unconverted  men.  As 
God's  faithful  and  believing  children  we  receive  the 


340  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

"mind  of  the  Spirit;"  this  mind  of  the  Spirit  is  the 
testimony  of  the  Scriptures,  for  "the  testimony  of  Jesus 
is  the  Spirit  of  prophecy."  The  "mind  of  the  Spirit" 
contains  the  conditions  of  salvation.  The  gospel  is  the 
mind  of  the  Spirit  revealed.  In  the  revelation  made  by 
the  Spirit,  we  find  the  mind  or  the  will  of  the  heavenly 
Father.  The  apostles,  under  the  guidance  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  proclaimed  the  last  will  and  testament  of  the 
great  Testator.  We  receive  the  testimony;  we  believe 
the  testimony;  our  faith  is  founded  on  testimony;  we 
obey  the  conditions  of  the  gospel  and  obtain  the  re- 
mission of  our  sins;  consequently  the  mind  of  the  spirit 
of  the  believer  bears  witness  with  the  Spirit,  or,  wThich 
is  the  same  thing,  with  the  mind  of  the  Spirit,  that  he 
is  a  child  of  God,  because  he  has  received,  and  believed, 
and  obeyed  the  things  revealed  by  the  Holy  Spirit. 
Hence  also,  the  Christian  is  "led  by  the  Spirit  of  God." 
The  sinner  must  be  convicted  by  the  revealed  facts  of  the 
Spirit,  and  obey  the  truth  of  the  Spirit,  before  he  can 
claim  to  be  led  by  the  Spirit.  "For  as  many  as  are  led 
by  the  Spirit  of  God  [led  by  the  instructions  of  the  Spirit 
of  God],  they  are  the  sons  of  God."  (Rom.  viii.  16.) 
Paul's  admonition  to  Christians  is  this:  "Walk  in  the 
Spirit,  and  you  shall  not  fulfill  the  lust  of  the  flesh." 
"But  if  you  are  led  by  the  Spirit — 'by  the  law  of  the 
Spirit' — you  are  not  under  the  [Mosaic]  law."  (Gal.  v.) 
The  "groanings"  spoken  of  by  Paul  in  Rom.  viii.  22, 
26,  are  not  the  "groanings"  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  but  the 
groanings  of  this  flesh,  under  the  dominion  of  sin. 
Hear  Paul's  explanation  in  verse  27:  "And  he  who 
searches  the  hearts  [by  the  truth]  knows  what  is  the 
mind  of  the  Spirit,  because  he  makes  intercession  for  the 
saints  [not  for  the  sinners}  according  to  the  will  of  God.'' 
Intercession,  in  behalf  ot  the  saints,  is  made  through 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  341 

the  revealed  will  of  God.  It  is  the  promises  of  God 
that  help  our  infirmities.  Paul,  in  this  chapter,  is  speak- 
ing of  the  redemption  of  the  bodies  of  the  saints.  The 
body  of  the  saint  is  in  bondage,  groaning  and  travail- 
ing to  be  "delivered  from  the  bondage  of  corruption 
into  the  glorious  liberty  of  the  children  of  God."  The 
hope  of  the  Christian  is  the  redemption  of  his  body  from 
the  grave.  Paul  says  distinctly:  "Even  we  ourselves 
[we  Christians]  groan  within  ourselves,  waiting  for  the 
adoption,  viz.,  the  redemption  of  our  body"  from  the  pains 
and  penalties  of  physical  death. 

RESISTING  THE  HOLY  SPIRIT. — The  blessed  Stephen, 
standing  in  the  august  presence  of  the  Jewish  Sanhedrim? 
after  having  given  utterance  to  a  most  searching  sermon, 
based  on  a  long  line  of  historical  evidence,  and  deduced 
from  their  own  Scriptures,  and  proving  by  them  that 
this  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  thus  addressing 
them:  "You  stiff  necked  and  uncircumcised  in  heart 
and  ears,  you  do  always  resist  the  Holy  Spirit:  as  your 
fathers  did,  so  do  yon."  And  the  manner  of  resisting 
the  Holy  Spirit  is  thus  expressed  in  the  succeeding  verse: 
"Which  of  the  prophets  have  not  your  fathers  perse- 
cuted? And  they  have  slain  them  who  showed  before 
of  the  coming  of  the  Just  One;  of  whom  you  have  now 
been  the  murderers  and  betrayers;  who  have  received 
the  law  by  the  disposition  of  angels,  and  have  not  kept 
it.  When  they  heard  these  things  [these  words  of  burn- 
ing truth]  they  were  cut  to  the  heart."  (  Vets  vii.) 

By  reference  to  the  ninth  chapter  oi  Nehemiah,  we 
may  ascertain  how  the  Jewish  fathers  resisted  the  Spirit 
of  God.  The  prophet,  referring  to  the  guidance  of  the 
Israelites  through  the  wilderness,  says:  "Thou  gavest 
thy  good  Spirit  also  to  instruct  them.  .  .  .  Never- 
theless, they  were  disobedient,  and  rebelled  against  thee, 


342  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

and  cast  thy  law  behind  their  backs,  and  slew  thy 
prophets  who  testified  against  them.  .  .  .  Yet  many 
years  didst  thou  forbear  them,  and  testified  against  them 
by  thy  Spirit  in  thy  prophets;  yet  they  would  not  give 
ear;  therefore  thou  gavest  them  into  the  hand  of  the 
people  of  the  lands."  God  clothed  the  prophets  with 
his  Spirit.  "The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  clothed  Gideon." 
"  Then  the  Spirit  clothed  Amasai. "  "  The  Spirit  of  God 
clothed  Zechariah."  (Judges  vi.  34;  1  Chron.  xii.  18; 
2  Chron.  xxiv.  20.)  God  inspired  the  prophets;  clothed 
with  authority,  the  prophets  bore  the  message  of  God 
to  the  people;  by  resisting  the  prophets  the  people  re- 
sisted the  words  of  the  prophets;  by  resisting  the  words 
of  the  prophets  the  people  resisted  the  Spirit  of  God 
which  was  in  these  prophets.  In  the  same  manner  the 
Lord  clothed  the  apostles  with  the  Holy  Spirit.  Clothed 
with  the  Spirit,  the  apostles  bore  the  message  or  the 
words  of  salvation  to  the  nations  of  earth.  By  resist- 
ing the  words  of  the  apostles,  ungodly  men  resisted  the 
Spirit  of  God,  who  spoke  through  them.  These  were 
ministers  extraordinary.  Ministers  ordinary  now  take 
up  the  same  words,  and  bear  them  to  the  people.  "The 
gospel  is  the  power  of  God  unto  salvation,"  whether 
preached  by  the  apostles  or  by  uninspired  men.  All 
who  resist  the  truth  in  the  present  day,  resist  the  Spirit 
of  God  precisely  in  the  same  sense  that  wicked  people 
did  under  the  preaching  of  the  apostles,  because  it  was 
the  Spirit  of  God  that  revealed  the  same  truth.  The 
word  of  God  is  the  sword  of  the  Spirit,  and  when  rebels 
run  against  that  instrument,  they  plunge  against  that 
which  is  sharper  than  any  two-edged  sword.  (Ileb.  iv.) 
"While  it  is  true  that  in  this  way  sinners  resist  the 
truth,  and  therefore  the  Spirit  that  revealed  the  truth,  it 
is  equally  true  that  Christians  "  quench  the  Spirit "  by 


REFORMATORY   MOVEMENTS.  343 

neglecting  to  be  "led  by  the  Spirit"  wherever  Christian 
duty  has  been  pointed  out.  If  any  one  produces  the 
"fruits  of  the  Spirit,"  we  may  know  that  such  an  one  is 
under  the  power  and  influence  of  the  Spirit.  If  any 
professed  Christian  produce  not  the  fruits  of  the  Spirit, 
but  is  sour  and  crabbed  and  petulant  and  ugly  in  dis- 
position, and  withal  covetous  and  avaricious,  though  he 
professes  to  have  been  baptized  in  the  Spirit,  we  ma}' 
conclude  at  once  that  that  person  is  not  under  the  direct- 
ing power  of  the  Spirit. 

PERSONALITY  OF  THE  HOLY  SPIRIT. — The  Holy  Spirit  is 
not  an  abstraction,  or  a  subtle  influence,  or  a  mystic 
effluence,  or  an  ethereal  intangibility  any  more  than  the 
Father  is,  any  more  than  the  Son  is.  The  Holy  Spirit 
is  always  represented  as  speaking  by  intelligible  language. 
When  the  antediluvians  resisted  the  Spirit  of  God, 
who  spoke  through  Noah,  and  resisted  the  Spirit  by 
resisting  the  words  of  the  Spirit,  God  said:  "My  Spirit 
shall  not  always  strive  with  man."  (Gen.  vi.  3.)  "Where- 
fore, as  the  Holy  Spirit  says,  To-day  if  you  will  hear  his 
[not  its]  voice,  harden  not  your  hearts."  (Heb.  iii.  7.) 
"The  Spirit  and  the  Bride  say,  Come,  and  let  him  that 
hears  say,  Come;  and  let  him  that  is  athirst  come;  and 
whosoever  will,  let  him  take  of  the  water  of  life  freely." 
(Rev.  xxii.  17.)  "He  that  hath  an  ear,  let  him  hear 
what  the  Spirit  says  to  the  churches/'  (Rev.  ii.  and  iii.) 
"The  Spirit  speaks  expressly  that  in  the  last  days  some 
shall  depart  from  the  faith."  (1  Tim.  iv.  1.)  If  we  had 
space,  and  deemed  the  fact  necessary  to  the  argument, 
we  could  adduce  an  abundance  of  Scripture  to  show 
that  the  Hojy  Spirit,  as  a  personal  being,  can  be  vexed, 
blasphemed,  lied  against,  tempted,  insulted.  This  can 
not  be  predicated  of  a  mere  influence;  for  an  influence 
can  not  be  vexed. 
28 


344  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

"Blessed  are  the  dead  that  die  in  the  Lord.  Yea,  says 
the  Spirit,  they  rest  from  their  labors,  aud  their  works 
do  follow  them." 

THE  LAW  OF  THE  SPIRIT. 

These  expressions  are  found  in  the  eighth  chapter  of 
Romans: 

"The  law  of  the  Spirit  of  life  in  Christ  Jesus  has 
made  me  free  from  the  law  of  sin  and  death." 

"  Who  walk  not  after  the  flesh,  but  after  the  Spirit. '' 

"For  they  that  are  after  the  flesh,  do  mind  the  things 
of  the  flesh ;  but  they  that  are  after  the  Spirit,  the  things 
of  the  Spirit." 

"But  you  are  not  in  tbe  flesh,  but  in  the  Spirit,  if  so 
be  that  the  Spirit  of  God  dwell  in  you.  Now,  if  any 
man  have  not  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  he  is  none  of  his." 

"But  if  Christ  be  in  you,  the  body  is  dead,  because 
of  sin;  but  the  Spirit  is  life,  because  of  righteousness." 

"But  if  the  Spirit  of  him  that  raised  up  Jesus  from 
the  dead,  dwell  in  you,  he  that  raised  up  Christ  from  the 
dead  shall  also  quicken  your  mortal  bodies  by  his  Spirit 
that  dwelleth  in  you." 

"For  if  you  live  after  the  flesh,  you  shall  die;  but  if 
ye  through  the  Spirit,  do  mortify  the  deeds  of  the  body, 
ye  shall  live." 

"For  as  many  as  are  led  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  they 
are  the  sons  of  God." 

"But  you  have  not  received  the  spirit  of  bondage 
again  to  fear;  but  you  have  received  the  spirit  of  adop- 
tion, whereby  we  cry,  'Abba,  Father!"1 

"The  Spirit  also  bears  witness  with  our  spirit, that  we 
are  the  children  of  God." 

"Who  have  the  first-fruits  of  the  Spirit?" 

"Likewise  the  Spirit  also  helps  our  infirmities." 

"But  the  Spirit  itself  makes  intercession  for  us." 

"And  he  that  searches  the  heart  knows  what  is  the 
mind  of  the  Spirit." 

In  the  first  citation,  we  see  at  a  glance  that  Paul  is 
comparing  the  law  of  the  Spirit — the  gospel — with  the 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  345 

law  of  Moses.  It  was  the  truth  contained  in  the  law 
of  the  Spirit,  that  made  Paul  free  from  the  bondage  of 
sin  and  death.  That  is,  the  conditions  of  salvation  arc 
found  in  that  law,  which,  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  was  sent 
down  from  heaven.  (1  Pet.  i.  12.)  All  the  epistolary 
writings  were  addressed  to  Christians,  and  not  to  the 
world.  Hence,  these  writings  can  not  be  applied  to  the 
world.  Christiana  are  not  to  follow  after  and  be  con- 
trolled by  the  instincts  of  the  flesh;  but  they  must  fol- 
low the  Spirit,  or  pay  strict  attention  to  the  things  re- 
vealed by  the  Spirit.  Christians  are  not  exhorted  to 
look  after  the  nature,  the  essence  and  the  origin  of  the 
Spirit.  Now  "the  things  of  the  Spirit"  are  the  facts  and 
precepts  and  promises  of  God  that  are  found  in  the  gos- 
pel. The  gospel  contains  the  good  news  of  salvation. 

Christians  can  not  walk  literally  in  the  Spirit,  for  since 
the  Spirit  is  an  intelligent  Person,  and  not  an  essence, 
how  could  such  a  thing  be?  That  which  is  flesh  itself 
can  not  walk  literally  in  the  flesh,  but  the  carnal  man  is 
subject  to  the  laws  of  an  animal  nature..  It  is  not  con- 
ceivable that  a  Christian  can  literally  walk  in  the  Spirit, 
and  the  Spirit  literally  dwell  in  him  at  one  and  the  same 
time.  This  would  be  a  palpable  contradiction  in  terms. 
A  Christian  can  enjoy  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  without  the 
necessity  of  the  actual  presence  of  Christ.  We  receive 
the  Spirit  of  Christ  by  receiving  his  words;  for  his 
"words  are  life  and  they  are  spirit."  His  words  com- 
municate eternal  life  to  the  children  of  God.  "Let  the 
word  of  Christ  dwell  in  you  richly  in  all  wisdom."  The 
germinating  power  is  in  "the  seed  of  the  kingdom." 
The  word  of  God  is  the  seed  of  the  kingdom.  Without 
receiving  the  doctrine  of  Christ,  we  can  not  receive  the 
Spirit  of  Christ.  And,  by  parity  of  reasoning,  we  can 
not  receive  the  Spirit,  unless  we  accept  "  the  law  of  the 


340  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

Spirit."     It  is  by  living  a  life  of  righteousness  that  we 
secure  to  ourselves  the  Spirit  of  life. 

The  same  Spirit  that  raised  up  Jesus  from  the  dead, 
will  also  quicken  our  mortal  bodies — raise  them  from  the 
dead — if  we  retain  in  our  hearts  the  germinating  prin- 
ciple of  life  which,  by  the  gospel,  is  communicated  to 
us.  If  we  follow  the  promptings  of  our  animal  desires, 
we  shall  surely  die;  but  if,  through  the  Spirit — minding 
the  things  of  the  Spirit — we  mortify  the  base  passions 
of  our  bodies,  we  shall  live.  Only  those  are  the  sons  of 
God  who  are  led  by  the  Spirit  of  God.  As  the  Spirit  is 
not  here  in  person  to  lead  us,  and  we  can  not  conceive 
of  being  led  by  an  essence  or  an  influence,  we  must  con- 
clude that  we  are  led  by  the  "mind  of  the  Spirit,"  that 
we  might  know,  by  positive  knowledge,  the  things  that 
are  freely  given  to  us.  (1  Cor.  ii.  12.)  Paul  says:  "I 
am  crucified  with  Christ;  nevertheless,  I  live;  yet  not  I, 
but  Christ  liveth  in  me;  and  the  life  which  I  now  live  in 
the  flesh,  I  lice  by  the  faith  of  the  Son  of  God,  who  loved 
me,  and  gave  himself  for  me."  (Gal.  ii.  20.)  Do  not 
all  Christians  live  in  the  same  manner?  In  Gal.  iii.  2? 
he  thus  questions  the  Galatians:  "This  only  would  I 
learn  of  you,  Received  you  the  Spirit  by  the  works  of 
the  law,  or  by  the  hearing  of  faith?  Are  you  so  foolish? 
having  begun  in  the  Spirit,  are  you  now  made  perfect  by 
the  flesh?"  These  Christians  were  under  the  dispensa- 
tion of  the  Spirit,  not  under  the  dispensation  of  Moses. 
In  the  same  chapter,  we  read  "that  the  blessing  of  Abra- 
ham might  come  on  the  Gentiles  through  Jesus  Christ; 
that  we  might  receive  the  promise  of  the  Spirit  through 
faith  ;  which  promise  is  the  blessing  of  salvation  through 
Christ."  In  Gal.  v.,  we  are  represented  as  obtaining 
our  liberty  through  Christ.  In  Romans,  we  are  made 
free  by  "the  law  of  the  Spirit;"  or,  in  other  words,  by 


REFORMATORY  MOVEMENTS.  347 

the  gospel  of  Christ.  In  the  fifth  verse,  again,  we  read: 
''For  we,  through  the  Spirit,  wait  for  the  hope  of  right- 
eousness by  faith."  These  Galatians  were  exhorted  to 
"walk  in  the  Spirit " — in  the  dispensation  of  the  Spirit, 
and  not  in  the  "lust  of  the  flesh,"  as  those  under  the 
law.  "But  if  you  be  led  of  the  Spirit,  you  are  not  un- 
der the  law."  This  is  Paul's  argument  throughout — 
running  a  parallel  between  the  law  and  the  gospel,  for 
the  benefit  of  those  Judaiziug  Christians  who  troubled 
the  churches. 

We  receive  ''the  Spirit  of  adoption,"  and  are  made 
"fellow-citizens  with  the  saints  in  light,"  by  being  "im- 
mersed into  the  one  body,"  under  the  dispensation  and 
direction  of  the  "one  Spirit."  The  Spirit,  or  "the  mind 
of  the  Spirit,"  "bears  witness  with  our  spirit,"  or  with 
the  mind  of  our  spirit,  that  we  '  'are  the  children  of  God," 
which  is  predicated  by  the  fact  that  we  are  led  by  the 
revelations  of  the  Spirit.  Consequently,  wherever  the 
mind  or  the  words  of  the  Spirit  go,  there  the  Spirit  is 
present;  but  in  what  special  sense  we  presume  not  to 
know,  any  more  than  we  know  how  God  is  present  in  a 
grain  of  corn  to  cause  it  to  grow.  We  pretend  to  know 
nothing  about  final  causes.  In  all  these  operations  we 
walk  by  faith,  not  by  sight.  The  Spirit  that  helps  our 
infirmities  can  not  be  an  abstract,  ethereal  Spirit,  or  a 
subtle  influence ;  and  the  Spirit  therefore  that  intercedes 
in  our  behalf,  must  intercede  through  some  medium; 
and,  hence,  to  save  ourselves  from  the  bewilderment  of 
all  mysticism,  we  must  conclude  that  "the  mind  of  the 
Spirit"  is  that  medium,  and  that  the  word  of  God  is  the 
mind  of  the  Spirit.  The  consolations  of  the  Spirit  come 
to  the  child  of  God  through  the  revelations  of  the  Spirit. 
And  the  Spirit  tells  us  by  revelation,  "That  eye  hath  not 
seen,  nor  ear  heard,  nor  hath  it  entered  the  heart  of  man, 


348  GOSPEL    PRINCIPLES. 

the  things  which  God  hath  laid  up  for  them  who  love 
him."  If  the  consolations  of  the  Spirit  do  not  come  to 
the  Christian  through  the  revelations  of  the  Spirit,  then 
the  whole  subject  is  wrapped  in  impenetrable  mysticism. 
It  is  all  summed  up  in  a  few  words  by  Paul  to  Timothy: 
"Hold  fast  the  form  of  sound  words,  which  thou  hast 
heard  of  me,  in  faith  and  love,  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus. 
That  good  thing  which  was  committed  to  thee,  keep,  by 
the  Holy  Spirit  which  dwells  in  us."  Satan  is  ever  try- 
ing to  catch  away  that  good  thing — the  word  of  God — 
out  of  our  hearts,  lest  we  should  believe  and  be  saved. 
(Luke  viii.  12.) 


THE    LSD. 


UCSB  LIBRARf 


